2022 ESC Guidelines on cardio-oncology

developed in collaboration with the European Hematology Association (EHA), the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ESTRO) and the International Cardio-Oncology Society (IC-OS)

Developed by the task force on cardio-oncology of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC)

Authors/Task Force Members: Alexander R. Lyon*† (Chairperson) (United Kingdom), Teresa López-Fernández*† (Chairperson) (Spain), Liam S. Couch (Task Force Coordinator) (United Kingdom), Riccardo Asteggiano (Italy), Marianne C. Aznar1 (United Kingdom), Jutta Bergler-Klein (Austria), Giuseppe Boriani (Italy), Daniela Cardinale (Italy), Raul Cordoba2 (Spain), Bernard Cosyns (Belgium), David J. Cutter (United Kingdom), Evandro de Azambuja (Belgium), Rudolf A. de Boer (Netherlands), Susan F. Dent3 (United States of America), Dimitrios Farmakis (Cyprus), Sofie A. Gevaert (Belgium), Diana A. Gorog (United Kingdom), Joerg Herrmann3 (United States of America), Daniel Lenihan3 (United States of America), Javid Moslehi (United States of America), Brenda Moura (Portugal), Sonja S. Salinger (Serbia), Richard Stephens (United Kingdom), Thomas M. Suter (Switzerland), Sebastian Szmit (Poland), Juan Tamargo (Spain), Paaladinesh Thavendiranathan (Canada), Carlo G. Tocchetti (Italy), Peter van der Meer (Netherlands), Helena J.H. van der Pal (Netherlands), and ESC Scientific Document Group

*Corresponding authors: Alexander R. Lyon, National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London and Cardio-Oncology Service, Royal Brompton Hospital, London, United Kingdom. Tel: +44 207 352 8121, E-mail: a.lyon@imperial.ac.uk. Teresa López-Fernández, Cardiology Department, La Paz University Hospital, IdiPAZ Research Institute, Madrid, Spain. Tel: +34 619 227 076, E-mail: tlfernandez8@gmail.com. † The two chairpersons contributed equally to the document and are joint corresponding authors. Author/Task Force Member affiliations are listed in Author information. 1Representing the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ESTRO); 2representing the European Hematology Association (EHA); 3representing the International Cardio-Oncology Society (IC-OS). ESC Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) Committee: listed in the Appendix. ESC subspecialty communities having participated in the development of this document: Associations: Association for Acute CardioVascular Care (ACVC), European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI), European Association of Preventive Cardiology (EAPC), European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI), European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA), Heart Failure Association (HFA). Councils: Council of Cardio-Oncology, Council on Hypertension, Council on Valvular Heart Disease. Working Groups: Aorta and Peripheral Vascular Diseases, Cardiovascular Pharmacotherapy, e-Cardiology, Myocardial Function, Pulmonary Circulation and Right Ventricular Function, Thrombosis. Patient Forum European Heart Journal (2022) 43, 4229–4361 https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehac244 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

Document Reviewers: Patrizio Lancellotti (CPG Review Coordinator) (Belgium), Franck Thuny (CPG Review Coordinator) (France), Magdy Abdelhamid (Egypt), Victor Aboyans (France), Berthe Aleman1 (Netherlands), Joachim Alexandre (France), Ana Barac3 (United States of America), Michael A. Borger (Germany), Ruben Casado-Arroyo (Belgium), Jennifer Cautela (France), Jolanta Čelutkienė (Lithuania), Maja Cikes (Croatia), Alain Cohen-Solal (France), Kreena Dhiman (United Kingdom), Stéphane Ederhy (France), Thor Edvardsen (Norway), Laurent Fauchier (France), Michael Fradley3 (United States of America), Julia Grapsa (United Kingdom), Sigrun Halvorsen (Norway), Michael Heuser2 (Germany), Marc Humbert (France), Tiny Jaarsma (Sweden), Thomas Kahan (Sweden), Aleksandra Konradi (Russian Federation), Konstantinos C. Koskinas (Switzerland), Dipak Kotecha (United Kingdom), Bonnie Ky3 (United States of America), Ulf Landmesser (Germany), Basil S. Lewis (Israel), Ales Linhart (Czech Republic), Gregory Y.H. Lip (United Kingdom), Maja-Lisa Løchen (Norway), Katarzyna Malaczynska-Rajpold (United Kingdom), Marco Metra (Italy), Richard Mindham (United Kingdom), Marie Moonen (Belgium), Tomas G. Neilan (United States of America), Jens Cosedis Nielsen (Denmark), Anna-Sonia Petronio (Italy), Eva Prescott (Denmark), Amina Rakisheva (Kazakhstan), Joe-Elie Salem (France), Gianluigi Savarese (Sweden), Marta Sitges (Spain), Jurrien ten Berg (Netherlands), Rhian M. Touyz (Canada/United Kingdom), Agnieszka Tycinska (Poland), Matthias Wilhelm (Switzerland), and Jose Luis Zamorano (Spain)

All experts involved in the development of these Guidelines have submitted declarations of interest. These have been compiled in a report and published in a supplementary document simultaneously to the Guidelines. The report is also available on the ESC website www.escardio.org/Guidelines

See the European Heart Journal online for supplementary data that includes background information and detailed discussion of the data that have provided the basis of the guidelines.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Keywords Guidelines • Androgen deprivation therapy • Anthracycline • Atrial fibrillation • Arrhythmias • Biomarkers • Cancer • Cancer survivors • Carcinoid syndrome • Amyloid light-chain cardiac amyloidosis • Cardiac magnetic resonance • Cardiac tumour • Cardio-oncology • Cardiotoxicity • Coronary artery disease • Chemotherapy • Echocardiography • Fluoropyrimidine • Heart failure • Haematopoietic stem cell transplantation • Hormone therapy • Hypertension • Immunotherapy • Ischaemic heart disease • Myocarditis • Pericardial disease • Pulmonary hypertension • Thrombosis • Risk stratification • Trastuzumab • Valvular heart disease • Vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors (VEGFi) • Venous thromboembolism • Pericardial disease • Proteasome inhibitors • QTc prolongation • Radiotherapy • Strain

The content of these European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Guidelines has been published for personal and educational use only. No commercial use is authorized. No part of the ESC Guidelines may be translated or reproduced in any form without written permission from the ESC. Permission can be obtained upon submission of a written request to Oxford University Press, the publisher of the European Heart Journal and the party authorized to handle such permissions on behalf of the ESC (journals.permissions@oup.com). Disclaimer: The ESC Guidelines represent the views of the ESC and were produced after careful consideration of the scientific and medical knowledge and the evidence available at the time of their publication. The ESC is not responsible in the event of any contradiction, discrepancy and/or ambiguity between the ESC Guidelines and any other official recommendations or guidelines issued by the relevant public health authorities, in particular in relation to good use of healthcare or therapeutic strategies. Health professionals are encouraged to take the ESC Guidelines fully into account when exercising their clinical judgement, as well as in the determination and the implementation of preventive, diagnostic or therapeutic medical strategies; however, the ESC Guidelines do not override, in any way whatsoever, the individual responsibility of health professionals to make appropriate and accurate decisions in consideration of each patient’s health condition and in consultation with that patient and, where appropriate and/or necessary, the patient’s caregiver. Nor do the ESC Guidelines exempt health professionals from taking into full and careful consideration the relevant official updated recommendations or guidelines issued by the competent public health authorities, in order to manage each patient’s case in light of the scientifically accepted data pursuant to their respective ethical and professional obligations. It is also the health professional’s responsibility to verify the applicable rules and regulations relating to drugs and medical devices at the time of prescription. This article has been co-published with permission in the European Heart Journal and the European Heart Journal – Cardiovascular Imaging. © The European Society of Cardiology 2022. All rights reserved. The articles are identical except for minor stylistic and spelling differences in keeping with each journal’s style. Either citation can be used when citing this article. For permissions please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted, used for text and data mining, or used for training artificial intelligence, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by license or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization. Inquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above. ESC Guidelines are protected by copyright. As per opt out option under Article 4 §3 of EU Directive 2019/790, the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) reserves all rights to license uses of ESC Guidelines to train or develop generative artificial intelligence (AI) models, large language models or other deep learning or machine learning models. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

Table of contents

1. Preamble ........................................................................................................ 4236 2. Introduction ................................................................................................. 4238 2.1. Cancer and cardiovascular needs of patients with cancer 4238 2.2. Role of cardio-oncology services ............................................... 4238 2.3. General principles of cardio-oncology ..................................... 4239 3. Cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity definitions ..... 4242 4. Cardiovascular toxicity risk stratification before anticancer therapy ................................................................................................................. 4244 4.1. General approach to cardiovascular toxicity risk in patients with cancer ................................................................................................... 4244 4.2. History and clinical examination ................................................. 4249 4.3. Electrocardiogram ............................................................................. 4249 4.4. Cardiac serum biomarkers ............................................................ 4251 4.5. Cardiovascular imaging ................................................................... 4252 4.6. Cardiopulmonary fitness assessment ....................................... 4253 4.7. Cardiovascular risk evaluation before cancer surgery ...... 4254 4.8. Genetic testing ................................................................................... 4254 5. Prevention and monitoring of cardiovascular complications during cancer therapy ................................................................................... 4254 5.1. General principles ............................................................................. 4254 5.2. Primary prevention strategies ...................................................... 4256 5.2.1. Primary prevention of cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity during anthracycline chemotherapy .................................................................................. 4256 5.2.2. Primary prevention of radiation-induced cardiovascular toxicity .................................................................. 4256 5.3. Secondary prevention strategies ................................................ 4257 5.4. Cardiovascular surveillance during cancer therapies ......... 4257 5.4.1. Cardiac serum biomarkers ............................................. 4257 5.4.2. Cardiac imaging .................................................................... 4257 5.5. Cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity monitoring protocols ....................................................................................................... 4259 5.5.1. Anthracycline chemotherapy ......................................... 4259 5.5.2. HER2-targeted therapies ................................................. 4259 5.5.3. Fluoropyrimidines ............................................................... 4261 5.5.4. Vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors ........ 4261 5.5.5. Multitargeted kinase inhibitors targeting BCR-ABL 4264 5.5.6. Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors ................................. 4267 5.5.7. Multiple myeloma therapies ........................................... 4268 5.5.8. Rapidly accelerated fibrosarcoma and mitogenactivated extracellular signal-regulated kinase inhibitor treatment ............................................................................................ 4271 5.5.9. Immune checkpoint inhibitors ...................................... 4273 5.5.10. Androgen deprivation therapies for prostate cancer ................................................................................................... 4274 5.5.11. Endocrine therapies for breast cancer ................... 4276 5.5.12. Cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors .................. 4276 5.5.13. Anaplastic lymphoma kinase inhibitors ................... 4277 5.5.14. Epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors ...... 4277 5.5.15. Chimeric antigen receptor T cell and tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes therapies ..... 4278 5.5.16. Radiotherapy ...................................................................... 4279 5.5.17. Haematopoietic stem cell transplantation ............ 4279 5.5.18. Other cancer treatments ............................................. 4282 6. Diagnosis and management of acute and subacute cardiovascular toxicity in patients receiving anticancer treatment 4282 6.1. Cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction .......................... 4282 6.1.1. Anthracycline chemotherapy-related cardiac dysfunction ......................................................................................... 4282 6.1.2. Human epidermal receptor 2-targeted therapyrelated cardiac dysfunction ......................................................... 4284 6.1.3. Immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated myocarditis and non-inflammatory heart failure ............... 4286 6.1.4. Chimeric antigen receptor T cell and tumourinfiltrating lymphocytes therapies and heart dysfunction 4290 6.1.5. Heart failure during haematopoietic stem cell transplantation ................................................................................. 4291 6.1.6. Takotsubo syndrome and cancer ................................ 4291 6.2. Coronary artery disease ................................................................. 4291 6.2.1. Acute coronary syndromes ............................................ 4291 6.2.2. Chronic coronary syndromes ....................................... 4293 6.3. Valvular heart disease ...................................................................... 4293 6.4. Cardiac arrhythmias ......................................................................... 4294 6.4.1. Atrial fibrillation ................................................................... 4294 6.4.2. Long corrected QT interval and ventricular arrhythmias ........................................................................................ 4298 6.4.3. Bradyarrhythmias ................................................................ 4300 6.5. Arterial hypertension ....................................................................... 4300 6.6. Thrombosis and thromboembolic events .............................. 4303 6.6.1. Venous thromboembolism ............................................. 4303 6.6.2. Arterial thromboembolism ............................................ 4304 6.6.3. Intracardiac thrombosis ................................................... 4304 6.6.4. Anticoagulation therapy ................................................... 4305 6.7. Bleeding complications .................................................................... 4306 6.7.1. High-risk patients ................................................................ 4306 6.7.2. Antiplatelet therapy ........................................................... 4306 6.7.3. Management of bleeding .................................................. 4306 6.8. Peripheral artery disease ................................................................ 4307 6.9. Pulmonary hypertension ................................................................ 4307 6.10. Pericardial diseases ......................................................................... 4308 6.10.1. Pericarditis ........................................................................... 4308 6.10.2. Pericardial effusion ........................................................... 4308 7. End-of-cancer therapy cardiovascular risk assessment ............. 4309 7.1. Cardiovascular evaluation during the first year after cardiotoxic anticancer therapy ............................................................ 4309 7.2. Which cancer survivors require cardiovascular surveillance in the first year after cancer treatment? .......................................... 4309 7.3. Management of cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction at the end-of-therapy assessment ...................................................... 4310 7.4. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing and fitness during the end-of-therapy assessment .................................................................... 4310 7.5. The role of cardiac rehabilitation ............................................... 4310 8. Long-term follow-up and chronic cardiovascular complications in cancer survivors .......................................................................................... 4312 8.1. Cancer survivors ................................................................................ 4312 8.1.1. Adult survivors of childhood and adolescent cancer ................................................................................................... 4312 8.1.2. Adult cancer survivors ...................................................... 4313 8.2. Myocardial dysfunction and heart failure ................................ 4315 8.3. Coronary artery disease ................................................................. 4316 8.4. Valvular heart disease ...................................................................... 4317 8.5. Peripheral artery disease and stroke ........................................ 4317 8.6. Pericardial complications ................................................................ 4317 8.7. Arrhythmias and autonomic disease ......................................... 4318 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

8.8. Metabolic syndrome, lipid abnormalities, diabetes mellitus, and hypertension ........................................................................................ 4318 8.9. Pregnancy in cancer survivors ..................................................... 4318 8.10. Pulmonary hypertension .............................................................. 4319 9. Special populations .................................................................................... 4319 9.1. Cardiac tumours ................................................................................ 4319 9.2. Pregnant patients with cancer ..................................................... 4319 9.2.1. Left ventricular dysfunction and heart failure ........ 4320 9.2.2. Venous thromboembolism and pulmonary embolism ..................................................................................... 4320 9.3. Carcinoid valvular heart disease ................................................. 4323 9.4. Amyloid light-chain cardiac amyloidosis .................................. 4324 9.5. Cardiac implantable electronic devices .................................... 4326 10. Patient information, communication, and self-management 4330 11. The role of scientific societies in the promotion and development of cardio-oncology in modern medicine .................. 4331 12. Key messages ............................................................................................ 4331 13. Future needs .............................................................................................. 4332 14. Gaps in evidence ...................................................................................... 4333 15. ‘What to do’ and ‘what not to do’ messages from the Guidelines ........................................................................................................... 4333 16. Quality indicators for cardio-oncology .......................................... 4342 17. Supplementary data ................................................................................ 4342 18. Data availability statement ................................................................... 4342 19. Author information ................................................................................ 4342 20. Appendix ..................................................................................................... 4342 21. References .................................................................................................. 4343

Tables of Recommendations

Recommendation Table 1 — Recommendations for a general approach to cardiovascular toxicity risk categorization ................. 4249 Recommendation Table 2 — Recommendations for electrocardiogram baseline assessment ................................................ 4251 Recommendation Table 3 — Recommendation for cardiac biomarker assessment prior to potentially cardiotoxic therapies . 4252 Recommendation Table 4 — Recommendations for cardiac imaging modalities in patients with cancer .......................................... 4253 Recommendation Table 5 — Recommendations for primary prevention of cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity ......................................................................................................... 4256 Recommendation Table 6 — Recommendation for secondary prevention of cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity ..... 4257 Recommendation Table 7 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during anthracycline chemotherapy and in the first 12 months after therapy .............................................. 4259 Recommendation Table 8 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during human epidermal receptor 2-targeted therapies and in the first 12 months after therapy ... 4260 Recommendation Table 9 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during fluoropyrimidine therapy ..... 4261 Recommendation Table 10 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors ............................................................................... 4264 Recommendation Table 11 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during second- and third-generation breakpoint cluster region–Abelson oncogene locus tyrosine kinase inhibitors ................................................................. 4267 Recommendation Table 12 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy .............................................................................................. 4267 Recommendation Table 13 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during multiple myeloma therapies ..................................................................................................... 4271 Recommendation Table 14 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during combined rapidly accelerated fibrosarcoma and mitogen-activated extracellular signal-regulated kinase inhibitor therapy ............................................... 4272 Recommendation Table 15 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during immunotherapy ............... 4274 Recommendation Table 16 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer ....................................................................... 4276 Recommendation Table 17 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during endocrine therapy for breast cancer .................................................................................................... 4276 Recommendation Table 18 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor therapy ...................................................................................... 4277 Recommendation Table 19 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during anaplastic lymphoma kinase and epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors ............... 4277 Recommendation Table 20 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment and monitoring in patients receiving chimeric antigen receptor T cell and tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes therapies ............................................................................................................. 4279 Recommendation Table 21 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment of patients before radiotherapy to a volume including the heart .......................................................................................... 4279 Recommendation Table 22 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment in haematopoietic stem cell transplantation patients ................................................................................................................ 4281 Recommendation Table 23 — Recommendation for the management of cardiovascular disease and cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity in patients receiving anticancer treatment ..................................................................................... 4282 Recommendation Table 24 — Recommendations for the management of cancer treatment-related cardiac dysfunction during anthracycline chemotherapy ........................................................ 4284 Recommendation Table 25 — Recommendations for the management of cancer treatment-related cardiac dysfunction during human epidermal receptor 2-targeted therapies ............... 4286 Recommendation Table 26 — Recommendations for the diagnosis and management of immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated myocarditis ............................................................... 4289 Recommendation Table 27 — Recommendations for the diagnosis and management of Takotsubo syndrome in patients with cancer ........................................................................................................ 4291 Recommendation Table 28 — Recommendations for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients receiving anticancer treatment ..................................................................................... 4292 Recommendation Table 29 — Recommendation for the management of chronic coronary syndromes in patients receiving anticancer treatment ..................................................................................... 4293 Recommendation Table 30 — Recommendations for the management of valvular heart disease in patients receiving anticancer treatment ..................................................................................... 4293 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

Recommendation Table 31 — Recommendations for the management of atrial fibrillation in patients receiving anticancer treatment ............................................................................................................ 4297 Recommendation Table 32 — Recommendations for the management of long corrected QT interval and ventricular arrhythmias in patients receiving anticancer treatment ................. 4300 Recommendation Table 33 — Recommendations for the management of arterial hypertension in patients receiving anticancer treatment ..................................................................................... 4302 Recommendation Table 34 — Recommendations for the management of venous thromboembolism in patients receiving anticancer treatment ..................................................................................... 4305 Recommendation Table 35 — Recommendations for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis during anticancer treatment ...... 4306 Recommendation Table 36 — Recommendation for management of peripheral artery disease during anticancer treatment .................. 4307 Recommendation Table 37 — Recommendations for the management of pulmonary hypertension during anticancer treatment ............................................................................................................ 4308 Recommendation Table 38 — Recommendations for the management of pericardial diseases in patients receiving anticancer treatment ..................................................................................... 4309 Recommendation Table 39 — Recommendations for end-of-cancer therapy cardiovascular risk assessment ................... 4312 Recommendation Table 40 — Recommendations for cardiovascular surveillance in asymptomatic adults who are childhood and adolescent cancer survivors ......................................... 4313 Recommendation Table 41 — Recommendations for cardiovascular surveillance in asymptomatic adult cancer survivors 4314 Recommendation Table 42 — Recommendations for adult cancer survivors who develop cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction late after cardiotoxic cancer therapy ............................ 4316 Recommendation Table 43 — Recommendations for adult cancer survivors with coronary artery disease .................................. 4316 Recommendation Table 44 — Recommendations for adult cancer survivors with valvular heart disease ....................................... 4317 Recommendation Table 45 — Recommendation for adult cancer survivors with pericardial complications ............................................... 4318 Recommendation Table 46 — Recommendations for cardiovascular monitoring in cancer survivors during pregnancy 4319 Recommendation Table 47 — Recommendations for cardiovascular assessment and monitoring of pregnant women with cancer ............. 4323 Recommendation Table 48 — Recommendations for carcinoid valvular heart diseases ................................................................................... 4323 Recommendation Table 49 — Recommendations for amyloid light-chain cardiac amyloidosis diagnosis and monitoring .............. 4326 Recommendation Table 50 — Recommendations for risk stratification and monitoring for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices undergoing radiotherapy .................................................... 4330

List of tables

Table 1 Classes of recommendations .................................................... 4237 Table 2 Levels of evidence .......................................................................... 4237 Table 3 Cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity definitions 4243 Table 4 Heart Failure Association–International Cardio-Oncology Society baseline cardiovascular toxicity risk stratification ............... 4246 Table 5 Anthracycline equivalence dose ............................................... 4247 Table 6 Factors that could influence peri-operative risk during cancer surgery and preventive strategies ............................................. 4254 Table 7 Cancer treatments that predispose to acute coronary syndromes .......................................................................................................... 4291 Table 8 Risk factors for drug-induced QT prolongation and torsade de pointes .......................................................................................... 4298 Table 9 Classification of corrected QT interval prolongation induced by cancer drug therapy ............................................................... 4298 Table 10 Risk factors for future cardiovascular disease at the end-of-cancer therapy cardiovascular risk assessment ................... 4310 Table 11 Risk categories for asymptomatic adults who are childhood and adolescent cancer survivors ......................................... 4313 Table 12 Risk categories for asymptomatic adult cancer survivors 4314 Table 13 Management strategies and surgery indications for symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with benign and malignant cardiac tumours .......................................................................... 4321

List of figures

Figure 1 Video 1 Central Illustration: Dynamics of cardiovascular toxicity risk of patients with cancer over their therapy continuum .................................................................................. 4239 Figure 2 Cardio-oncology care pathways ............................................. 4240 Figure 3 Baseline cardiovascular toxicity risk assessment checklist 4241 Figure 4 Dimensions of cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity risk and disease severity .............................................................. 4242 Figure 5 Baseline cardiovascular toxicity risk assessment before anticancer therapy .......................................................................................... 4245 Figure 6 General cardio-oncology approach after Heart Failure Association–International Cardio-Oncology Society cardiovascular toxicity risk assessment ................................................ 4248 Figure 7 Baseline screening recommendations for patients with cancer treated with potentially cardiotoxic drugs ............................ 4250 Figure 8 Recommended transthoracic echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging parameters in the evaluation of patients with cancer ............................................................................................... 4252 Figure 9 Primary and secondary cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity prevention .................................................................. 4255 Figure 10 Cardiovascular toxicity monitoring in patients receiving anthracycline chemotherapy ...................................................................... 4258 Figure 11 Cardiovascular toxicity monitoring in patients receiving human epidermal receptor 2-targeted therapies .............................. 4260 Figure 12 Vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors-related cardiovascular toxicities ............................................................................... 4262 Figure 13 Cardiovascular toxicity monitoring in patients receiving vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors ..................................... 4263 Figure 14 Breakpoint cluster region–Abelson oncogene locus tyrosine kinase inhibitor-related cardiovascular toxicities ............ 4265 Figure 15 Second- and third-generation breakpoint cluster region–Abelson oncogene locus tyrosine kinase inhibitors surveillance protocol ..................................................................................... 4266 Figure 16 Multiple myeloma drug-related cardiovascular toxicities 4268 Figure 17 Cardiovascular monitoring in patients with multiple myeloma receiving proteasome inhibitors ........................................... 4269 Figure 18 Risk factors for venous thromboembolic events in patients with multiple myeloma ............................................................... 4270 Figure 19 Rapidly accelerated fibrosarcoma and mitogen-activated extracellular signal-regulated kinase inhibitor-related cardiovascular toxicities ........................................................................................................................ 4272 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

Figure 20 Cardiovascular surveillance in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors ................................................................... 4273 Figure 21 Androgen deprivation therapy-related cardiovascular toxicities .............................................................................................................. 4275 Figure 22 Anaplastic lymphoma kinase and epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor-related cardiovascular toxicities ........... 4278 Figure 23 Radiotherapy mean heart dose and associated cardiovascular toxicity risk .......................................................................... 4280 Figure 24 Risk factors and cardiovascular surveillance in patients referred for haematopoietic stem cell transplantation .................. 4281 Figure 25 Management of anthracycline chemotherapy-related cardiac dysfunction ......................................................................................... 4283 Figure 26 Management of human epidermal receptor 2-targeted therapy-related cardiac dysfunction ........................................................ 4285 Figure 27 Direct and indirect immune checkpoint inhibitor-related cardiovascular toxicity ................................................ 4287 Figure 28 Diagnosis and management of immune checkpoint inhibitor-related myocarditis ...................................................................... 4288 Figure 29 Diagnosis and management workup in cancer-related Takotsubo syndrome .................................................................................... 4290 Figure 30 Pathophysiology of atrial fibrillation associated with cancer ................................................................................................................... 4295 Figure 31 Structured approach to anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation in patients with cancer ............................................................ 4296 Figure 32 Corrected QT interval monitoring before and during treatment with corrected QT interval-prolonging anticancer drugs 4299 Figure 33 Recommended threshold for asymptomatic hypertension treatment in different clinical scenarios .................... 4301 Figure 34 Treatment of arterial hypertension in patients with cancer ................................................................................................................... 4302 Figure 35 Risk factors for venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer ........................................................................................................ 4303 Figure 36 Structured approach to anticoagulation for venous thromboembolism in patients with active cancer ............................ 4304 Figure 37 Management of cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction after cancer therapy ............................................................. 4311 Figure 38 Long-term follow-up in cancer survivors ......................... 4315 Figure 39 Location of primary and secondary cardiac tumours . 4320 Figure 40 Diagnostic algorithm for cardiac masses .......................... 4321 Figure 41 Cardiac monitoring protocol for pregnant women receiving anthracycline-based chemotherapy ..................................... 4322 Figure 42 Carcinoid heart disease: clinical features and diagnostic tests ....................................................................................................................... 4324 Figure 43 Non-invasive diagnosis of amyloid light-chain cardiac amyloidosis ......................................................................................................... 4325 Figure 44 Risk stratification in patients with a cardiac implantable electronic device undergoing radiotherapy ......................................... 4327 Figure 45 Management of patients with a cardiac implantable electronic device located in the radiotherapy treatment beam . 4328 Figure 46 Management of patients with a cardiac implantable electronic device located outside the radiotherapy treatment volume ................................................................................................................. 4329 Figure 47 Patient information, communication, and self-management .............................................................................................. 4330 Figure 48 The role of scientific societies in the promotion and development of cardio-oncology ............................................................. 4331 Abbreviations and acronyms

2D Two-dimensional 3D Three-dimensional 5-FU 5-fluorouracil 5HIAA 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid a′ Late diastolic velocity of mitral annulus obtained by tissue Doppler imaging ABC Atrial fibrillation Better Care ABI Ankle–brachial index AC Anthracycline chemotherapy ACE-I Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors ACS Acute coronary syndromes ADT Androgen deprivation therapy ADVANCE Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron-MR Controlled Evaluation AF Atrial fibrillation AI Aromatase inhibitors AL-CA Amyloid light-chain cardiac amyloidosis ALK Anaplastic lymphoma kinase ANS Autonomic nervous system ARB Angiotensin receptor blockers ARISTOTLE Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation ASCVD AtheroSclerotic Cardiovascular Disease ASPIRE Carfilzomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone vs. Lenalidomide and Dexamethasone for the Treatment of Patients with Relapsed Multiple Myeloma ASTCT American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy ATAC ‘Arimidex’ and Tamoxifen Alone or in Combination ATE Arterial thromboembolism AV Atrioventricular BB Beta-blockers BC Breast cancer BCR-ABL Breakpoint cluster region–Abelson oncogene locus BIG Breast International Group BLEED Increased bleeding risk BMI Body mass index BNP B-type natriuretic peptide BP Blood pressure BTK Bruton tyrosine kinase C Chemotherapy cycle CABG Coronary artery bypass graft CAD Coronary artery disease CARDIOTOX CARDIOvascular TOXicity induced by cancer-related therapies CAR-T Chimeric antigen receptor T cell CCB Calcium channel blockers CCS Chronic coronary syndromes CCTA Coronary computed tomography angiography Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

CCU Coronary care unit CDK Cyclin-dependent kinase CHA2DS2-VASc Congestive heart failure, Hypertension, Age ≥75 years (2 points), Diabetes mellitus, Stroke (2 points)—Vascular disease, Age 65–74 years, Sex category (female) CIED Cardiac implantable electronic device CML Chronic myeloid leukaemia CMR Cardiac magnetic resonance COMPASS-CAT Prospective COmparison of Methods for thromboembolic risk assessment with clinical Perceptions and AwareneSS in real-life patients—Cancer Associated Thrombosis CPET Cardiopulmonary exercise testing CrCl Creatinine clearance CRF Cardiorespiratory fitness CRS Cytokine release syndrome CS Cancer survivors CT Computed tomography CTLA-4 Cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 cTn Cardiac troponin CTRCD Cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction CTR-CVT Cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity CV Cardiovascular CVD Cardiovascular disease CVRF Cardiovascular risk factors DAPT Dual antiplatelet therapy DASISION DASatinib vs. Imatinib Study In treatment-Naïve chronic myeloid leukaemia patients DL Dyslipidaemia DM Diabetes mellitus DNR Do not resuscitate DVT Deep vein thrombosis E Mitral inflow early diastolic velocity obtained by pulsed wave e′ Early diastolic velocity of the mitral annulus obtained by tissue Doppler imaging EACTS European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery EBC Early breast cancer ECG Electrocardiogram Echo Echocardiography ECV Extracellular volume fraction eGFR Estimated glomerular filtration rate EGFR Epidermal growth factor receptor EMA European Medicines Agency EMB Endomyocardial biopsy ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 Effective Anticoagulation with Factor Xa Next Generation in Atrial Fibrillation- Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 48 ENOXACAN Enoxaparin and Cancer EoL End of life ERS European Respiratory Society ESC European Society of Cardiology ESC-CCO European Society of Cardiology Council of Cardio-Oncology ESH European Society of Hypertension EuroSCORE European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation FAC Fractional area change FDA Food and Drug Administration FLT3 FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3 FWLS Free wall longitudinal strain GI Gastrointestinal GLS Global longitudinal strain GnRH Gonadotropin-releasing hormone GU Genitourinary GVHD Graft vs. host disease Gy Gray HAS-BLED Hypertension, Abnormal renal and liver function, Stroke, Bleeding Labile international normalized ratio, Elderly, Drugs or alcohol HbA1c Glycated haemoglobin HDU High-dependency unit HER2 Human epidermal receptor 2 HF Heart failure HFA Heart Failure Association HFmrEF Heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction HFpEF Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction HFrEF Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction HG Hyperglycaemia HIIT High-intensity interval training HSCT Haematopoietic stem cell transplantation hs-cTn High-sensitivity cardiac troponin HTN Hypertension ICD Implantable cardioverter defibrillator ICI Immune checkpoint inhibitors ICOS International Cardio-Oncology Society ICU Intensive care unit IHD Ischaemic heart disease IMiD Immunomodulatory drugs i.v. Intravenous IVC Inferior vena cava IVS Intraventricular septum LA Left atrial LAA Left atrial appendage LGE Late gadolinium enhancement LIMA Left internal mammary artery LMWH Low-molecular-weight heparins LQTS Long QT syndrome LS Longitudinal strain LV Left ventricular LVD Left ventricular dysfunction LVEDD Left ventricular end diastolic diameter LVEF Left ventricular ejection fraction LVV Left ventricular volume M Months MACE Major adverse cardiovascular events MCS Mechanical circulatory support MDT Multidisciplinary team Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

MedDRA Medical dictionary for regulatory activities MEK Mitogen-activated extracellular signal-regulated kinase MHD Mean heart dose MI Myocardial infarction MM Multiple myeloma MUGA Multigated acquisition nuclear imaging N No NOAC Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants NP Natriuretic peptides NSTE-ACS Non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes NT-proBNP N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide PAD Peripheral artery disease PAH Pulmonary arterial hypertension PAP Pulmonary arterial pressure PCI Percutaneous coronary intervention PD-1 Programmed death-1 PD-L1 Programmed death-ligand 1 PE Pulmonary embolism Peric-E Pericardial effusion PET Positron emission tomography PH Pulmonary hypertension PI Proteasome inhibitors Pleu-E Pleural effusion PRECISE-DAPT PREdicting bleeding Complications In patients undergoing Stent implantation and subsEquent Dual Anti Platelet Therapy PRONOUNCE A Trial Comparing Cardiovascular Safety of Degarelix Versus Leuprolide in Patients With Advanced Prostate Cancer and Cardiovascular Disease PW Left ventricular posterior wall QI Quality indicator ↑QTc Corrected QT interval prolongation QTc Corrected QT interval QTcF Corrected QT interval using Fridericia correction RA Right atrial RAF Rapidly accelerated fibrosarcoma RCT Randomized controlled trial RIMA Right internal mammary artery ROCKET AF Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation RT Radiotherapy RV Right ventricular RVEF Right ventricular ejection fraction RVV Right ventricular volume s′ Systolic velocity of tricuspid annulus obtained by doppler tissue imaging SBr Sinus bradycardia SCORE2 Systematic Coronary Risk Estimation 2 SCORE2-OP Systematic Coronary Risk Estimation 2— Older Persons SEER Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results SMART Second manifestations of arterial disease sPAP Systolic pulmonary artery pressure SPEP Serum protein electrophoresis STEMI ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction STIR Short tau inversion recovery STS PROM Society of Thoracic Surgeons – Predicted Risk of Mortality SVT Supraventricular tachycardia SYNTAX SYNergy between percutaneous coronary intervention with TAXus and cardiac surgery TAPSE Tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion TAVI Transcatheter aortic valve implantation TBIP Thromboembolic risk, Bleeding risk, drug– drug Interactions, Patient preferences TdP Torsade de pointes TIL Tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes TKI Tyrosine kinase inhibitors TRV Tricuspid regurgitation velocity TTE Transthoracic echocardiography TTS Takotsubo syndrome tx Treatment ULN Upper limit of normal UPEP Urine protein electrophoresis VA Ventricular arrhythmias VascTox Vascular toxicity VEGF Vascular endothelial growth factor VEGFi Vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors VH Very high risk VHD Valvular heart disease VKA Vitamin K antagonists VTE Venous thromboembolism Y Yes

1 Preamble

Guidelines summarize and evaluate available evidence with the aim of assisting health professionals in proposing the best management strategies for an individual patient with a given condition. Guidelines and their recommendations should facilitate decision making of health professionals in their daily practice. However, guidelines are not a substitute for the patient’s relationship with their practitioner. The final decisions concerning an individual patient must be made by the responsible health professional(s), based on what they consider to be the most appropriate in the circumstances. These decisions are made in consultation with the patient and caregiver as appropriate. Guidelines are intended for use by health professionals. To ensure that all users have access to the most recent recommendations, the ESC makes its Guidelines freely available. The ESC warns readers that the technical language may be misinterpreted and declines any responsibility in this respect. A great number of guidelines have been issued in recent years by the ESC. Because of their impact on clinical practice, quality criteria for the development of guidelines have been established to make all decisions transparent to the user. The recommendations for formulating and issuing ESC Guidelines can be found on the ESC website (https://www. escardio.org/Guidelines). The ESC Guidelines represent the official position of the ESC on a given topic and are regularly updated. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

In addition to the publication of Clinical Practice Guidelines, the ESC carries out the EURObservational Research Programme of international registries of cardiovascular diseases and interventions, which are essential to assess diagnostic/therapeutic processes, use of resources and adherence to guidelines. These registries aim at providing a better understanding of medical practice in Europe and around the world, based on high-quality data collected during routine clinical practice. Furthermore, the ESC develops sets of quality indicators (QIs), which are tools to evaluate the level of implementation of the guidelines and may be used by the ESC, hospitals, healthcare providers and professionals to measure clinical practice, and in educational programmes, alongside the key messages from the guidelines, to improve quality of care and clinical outcomes. The Members of this Task Force were selected by the ESC to represent professionals involved with the medical care of patients with this pathology. The selection procedure aimed to ensure that there is a representative mix of members predominantly from across the whole of the ESC region and from relevant ESC Subspecialty Communities. Consideration was given to diversity and inclusion, notably with respect to gender and country of origin. A critical evaluation of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures was performed, including assessment of the risk–benefit ratio. The level of evidence and the strength of the recommendation of particular management options were weighed and scored according to predefined scales, as outlined below. The Task Force followed the ESC voting procedures. All recommendations subject to a vote achieved at least 75% among voting members.

The experts of the writing and reviewing panels provided declaration of interest forms for all relationships that might be perceived as real or potential sources of conflicts of interest. Their declarations of interest were reviewed according to the ESC declaration of interest rules and can be found on the ESC website (http://www.escardio.org/ Guidelines) and have been compiled in a report and published in a supplementary document simultaneously to the guidelines. This process ensures transparency and prevents potential biases in the development and review processes. Any changes in declarations of interest that arise during the writing period were notified to the

Table 1 Classes of recommendations

©ESC 2022

Classes of recommendations Class I Evidence and/or general agreement that a given treatment or procedure is beneficial, useful, effective.

efficacy of the given treatment or procedure.

favour of usefulness/efficacy.

Usefulness/efficacy is less well

useful/effective, and in some cases

Conflicting evidence and/or a divergence of opinion about the usefulness/

Is recommended or is indicated

Wording to use Definition

Class III Evidence or general agreement that the given treatment or procedure is not

may be harmful. Is not recommended

Class IIb

established by evidence/opinion. May be considered

Class IIa Weight of evidence/opinion is in Should be considered

Class II

Table 2 Levels of evidence

Level of evidence A

Level of evidence B

Level of evidence C Data derived from multiple randomized clinical trials or meta-analyses.

Data derived from a single randomized clinical trial or large non-randomized studies.

Consensus of opinion of the experts and/or small studies, retrospective studies, registries. ©ESC 2022 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

ESC and updated. The Task Force received its entire financial support from the ESC without any involvement from the healthcare industry. The ESC CPG supervises and coordinates the preparation of new guidelines. The Committee is also responsible for the approval process of these guidelines. The ESC Guidelines undergo extensive review by the CPG and external experts, including a mix of members from across the whole of the ESC region and from relevant ESC Subspecialty Communities and National Cardiac Societies. After appropriate revisions, the guidelines are signed off by all the experts involved in the Task Force. The finalized document is signed off by the CPG for publication in the European Heart Journal. The guidelines were developed after careful consideration of the scientific and medical knowledge and the evidence available at the time of their writing. The task of developing ESC Guidelines also includes the creation of educational tools and implementation programmes for the recommendations, including condensed pocket guideline versions, summary slides, summary cards for non-specialists and an electronic version for digital applications (smartphones, etc.). These versions are abridged and thus, for more detailed information, the user should always access the fulltext version of the guidelines, which is freely available via the ESC website and the European Heart Journal. The National Cardiac Societies of the ESC are encouraged to endorse, adopt, translate and implement all ESC Guidelines. Implementation programmes are needed because it has been shown that the outcome of disease may be favourably influenced by the thorough application of clinical recommendations. Health professionals are encouraged to take the ESC Guidelines fully into account when exercising their clinical judgement, as well as in the determination and the implementation of preventive, diagnostic or therapeutic medical strategies. However, the ESC Guidelines do not override in any way whatsoever the individual responsibility of health professionals to make appropriate and accurate decisions in consideration of each patient’s health condition and in consultation with that patient or the patient’s caregiver where appropriate and/or necessary. It is also the health professional’s responsibility to verify the rules and regulations applicable in each country to drugs and devices at the time of prescription and to respect the ethical rules of their profession. Off-label use of medication may be presented in this guideline if sufficient level of evidence shows that it can be considered medically appropriate to a given condition and if patients could benefit from the recommended therapy. However, the final decisions concerning an individual patient must be made by the responsible health professional giving special consideration to: (1) the specific situation of the patient. In this respect, it is specified that, unless otherwise provided for by national regulations, offlabel use of medication should be limited to situations where it is in the patient’s interest to do so, with regard to the quality, safety and efficacy of care, and only after the patient has been informed and has provided consent; (2) country-specific health regulations, indications by governmental

drug regulatory agencies and the ethical rules to which health professionals are subject, where applicable.

2 Introduction

This is the first European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guideline on cardio-oncology. The aim of this guideline is to help all the healthcare professionals providing care to oncology patients before, during, and after their cancer treatments with respect to their cardiovascular (CV) health and wellness. This guideline provides guidance on the definitions, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of cancer therapy-related CV toxicity (CTR-CVT), and the management of CV disease (CVD) caused directly or indirectly by cancer. This area of medicine has limited trials and evidence on which to base decision-making and, where evidence is limited, this guideline provides the consensus of expert opinion to guide healthcare professionals.

This guideline includes the definitions of CTR-CVT (Section 3),1 and provides a personalized approach to care based upon the baseline CV toxicity risk assessment (Section 4) and new protocols for CV surveillance during cancer treatment (Section 5). The management of acute CTR-CVT is addressed in Section 6, where patients with activecancer are those receiving anticancer treatment. Throughout these sections, decision-making depends upon the risk/benefit balance of oncology treatment efficacy and the severity and impact of CTR-CVT. Guidance is provided for the first 12 months after completion of cardiotoxic treatments (Section 7), when subacute CVD can emerge, and when patients who developed CTR-CVT during cancer treatment are reviewed. Diagnosis and management of the long-term CV complications of previous oncology treatments, beyond 12 months after completing the cardiotoxic treatments, and integration into the overall survivorship strategy for cancer survivors (CS) is presented in Section 8 with new long-term surveillance recommendations for high-risk patients. In Section 9, we address special populations where CVDs are directly caused by the cancer, or where special considerations are required. Section 10 provides information for patients’ involvement in their own care. The final section highlights the role of the ESC and the ESC Council of Cardio-Oncology (ESC-CCO). CTR-CVT risk is a dynamic variable, and the risk changes throughout the pathway of care (Figure 1, Video 1). Absolute risk of CTR-CVT is important to understand and balance against the absolute benefit of the cancer treatment before and during treatment. However, CTR-CVT risk can be influenced by several variables, including implementation of primary prevention treatments, optimization of pre-existing CVD, dose, frequency, and duration of oncology treatment, emergence of CV complications during treatment and their severity, and in CS, the overall cumulative treatment received, the time since treatment, and the interaction with other CVDs.

2.1 Cancer and cardiovascular needs of

patients with cancer Since the 1990s, there has been a steady decline in cancer-related mortality mirrored by a steady increase in CS.2,3 In this context, treatment-related side effects have gained more significance. Management of CTR-CVT has a tremendous impact on the type of anticancer therapies that patients can receive as well as the long-term morbidity and mortality outcomes of patients with cancer. Effective management of patients with both cancer and CVD requires the unique interest and expertise of healthcare providers, which has led to the formation of a new discipline: cardio-oncology.4,5 A recently published ESC-CCO document describes appropriate criteria for the organization and implementation of cardio-oncology services.5

2.2 Role of cardio-oncology services

The overarching goal of the cardio-oncology discipline is to allow patients with cancer to receive the best possible cancer treatments safely, Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

minimizing CTR-CVT across the entire continuum of cancer care.5 Before initiation of cancer therapies with a known CV toxicity profile, the cardio-oncology team should identify and treat CV risk factors (CVRF) and pre-existing CVDs and define an appropriate prevention and surveillance plan for early identification and appropriate management of potential CV complications (Figure 2). Another important aspect is the participation in interdisciplinary discussions regarding the benefits and risks of certain cancer treatments and their continuation or interruption should side effects become apparent. After cancer treatment has been completed, the focus shifts to co-ordination of long-term follow-up and treatment. For patients on long-term cancer therapies with CV toxicity risk, surveillance should continue until the treatment is finished.6–8 There is also the need for re-assessment of CV risks in patients requiring treatment for secondary malignancies.

2.3 General principles of

cardio-oncology A guiding principle of cardio-oncology is the integration of clinical disciplines. Cardio-oncology providers must have knowledge of the broad scope of cardiology, oncology, and haematology management.5 Recommendations are formed regarding the most permissible (from a

Time

Baseline

risk Du

D ring cardiotoxic

cancer thera p

p

p y y y

p

p

p Long-term foll f ow-up after cancer treatment

Primary and secondary prevention strategies Cancer treatment

surveillance Early CTR-CVT management Cancer survivorship programmes

Low risk

High risk

CTR-CVT CTR-CVT

risk risk

Figure 1 Video 1 Central Illustration: Dynamics of cardiovascular toxicity risk of patients with cancer over their therapy continuum. CS, cancer survivors; CTR-CVT, cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity; CV, cardiovascular; CVD, cardiovascular disease; CVRF, cardiovascular risk factors; CTR-CVT risk is a dynamic variable that changes through the pathway of care, and is influenced by several conditions including age, cancer history, pre-existing CVRF or CVD, and previous cardiotoxic cancer therapy. The CTR-CVT risk changes during and after treatment according to type, dose, frequency, and duration of oncology treatment (blue solid line). Pre-existing CVRF, CVD, or previous cancer treatments may increase the magnitude of acute and long-term CV toxicity risk (purple solid line). CTR-CVT risk remains variable in extent during anticancer treatment and may or may not gradually increase over time (dotted lines). Cardio-oncology strategy may reduce the magnitude of CTR-CVT by: (1) optimizing CVD and CVRF management (green arrows); (2) considering cardioprotective strategies in high-risk patients (green arrows); (3) organizing cancer treatment surveillance; and (4) introducing early cardioprotection after the detection of subclinical CTR-CVT (purple arrows). CV risk assessment within the first year after completion of cardiotoxic cancer therapy identifies CS who require long-term follow-up. Cancer survivorship programmes that include annual CV risk assessment and CVRF/CVD management are recommended to minimize long-term CV adverse events (brown arrows). Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

CVD perspective) and the most effective (from an oncological perspective) cancer treatment. Adjudication of CV events occurring in patients on active therapy is another important aspect of cardio-oncology practice.1,3 This is in addition to recommendations on best treatment and management practices. This includes the full scope of CV therapies, including healthy lifestyle promotion and pharmacological, device, and surgical treatments.4,9,10

The principle underlying the dynamic course of CTR-CVT development in patients with cancer is that the absolute risk depends on their baseline risk and changes with exposure to cardiotoxic therapies over

New cancer

diagnosis During cancer

treatmenta First year after cancer treatmentb Long term

follow-up

Cardio-Oncology Care Pathways

Class 1 Class 1Ia Class 1Ib

Baseline CV toxicity risk assessmentc Informing, advising, and supporting patients to promote a healthy lifestyle

Management of CVRF and CVD according to ESC Guidelines

Low risk patients Annual CVRF

assessmente

Reassessment if new CV

signs/symptoms

Standard surveillance Assessment at 1 year

after completion of

cancer therapy

Moderate risk

patients Annual CVRF assessmente CV toxicity re-stratification

at 5 years

TTE every 5 years Cardiology referrald

Assessment at 1 year after completion of

cancer therapy

High and very high risk

patients Annual CVRF

assessmente

TTE at years 1, 3, 5 and

every 5 years

Cardiology referrald

CVD prevention Assessment at 3 months and 1 year after completion of

cancer therapy

Cardiology referrald if new CV signs/symptoms or CTR-CVT develop

Figure 2 Cardio-oncology care pathways. BP, blood pressure; CS, cancer survivors; CTR-CVT, cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity; CV, cardiovascular; CVD, cardiovascular disease; CVRF, cardiovascular risk factors; ECG, electrocardiogram; ESC, European Society of Cardiology; HbA1c, glycated haemoglobin; HFA, Heart Failure Association; ICOS, International Cardio-Oncology Society; NP, natriuretic peptides; RT, radiotherapy; TTE, transthoracic echocardiography. aCV surveillance according to baseline CV toxicity risk, type of cancer, cancer stage, and cancer therapy. bCTR-CVT risk assessment is recommended during the first year after cardiotoxic cancer treatment to establish a long-term follow-up care plan. cThe use of HFA-ICOS risk assessment tools should be considered to assess CTR-CVT risk in patients with cancer scheduled to receive cardiotoxic anticancer therapy. Clinical assessment and ECG are recommended at baseline in all patients with cancer and echocardiography, cardiac biomarkers, or other cardiac imaging tests in selected patients according to baseline CV toxicity risk and cancer treatment type (see Figure 7). dCardio-oncology referral is recommended when available, alternatively patients should be referred to a specialized cardiologist with expertise in managing CVD in patients with cancer. eAnnual CV risk assessment (including clinical review, BP, lipid profile, HbA1c, ECG, and NP) and CVRF management is recommended in CS who were treated with a potentially cardiotoxic cancer drug or RT to a volume exposing the heart. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

time (Figure 3).11 This has been recognized in conceptual models, with risk stratification tools designed to grade patients with cancer into low, moderate, high, and very high risk of CV complications prior to starting treatment. These have been published by the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC in collaboration with the International Cardio-Oncology Society (ICOS) (see Section 4).12,13 Severity, duration, and type of manifestation of CTR-CVT vary by type of malignancy and cancer treatment. The risk itself can be understood in two ways: (1) the likelihood of its occurrence and (2) the severity of the complication (Figure 4). For example, a patient could be very likely to experience a CTR-CVT, but if this event is mild, oncology treatment should continue. Conversely, a patient at low likelihood could still be at high risk according to the severity of the event, which would lead to interruption of cancer treatment, e.g. a significant decline in left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (LVEF) to , 40% with anthracycline chemotherapy. The timeline of these developments may also be rather different. After the cardiotoxic cancer treatment has been completed, a new risk assessment is recommended to establish different long-term trajectories of CV health. These trajectories are impacted by the permanent CV toxic effects and cardiac or vascular injury of some cancer therapies, patient-related CVRF, environmental factors, and stressors (e.g. acute viral infections). The aim should be to personalize approaches to minimize CTR-CVT and improve both cancer and CV outcomes.

Baseline CV toxicity risk assessment checklist

Cancer treatment history CV history CVRF Physical examination Vital signs measurementa BNP or NT-p T roBNPb

cTnb ECG Fasting plasma glucose / HbA1c Kidney function / eGFR Lipid profile TTEc

Clinical assessment Complementary tests

CTR-CVT risk factors Medical

CVRF Previous

CVD

Lifestyle risk factors

ECG, TTE, and cardiac biomarkers

abnormalities

Previous cardiotoxic

therapies Age, sex,

genetics

Figure 3 Baseline cardiovascular toxicity risk assessment checklist. BNP, B-type natriuretic peptide; cTn, cardiac troponin; CTR-CVT, cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity; CV, cardiovascular; CVD, CV disease; CVRF, cardiovascular risk factors; ECG, electrocardiogram; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; HbA1c, glycated haemoglobin; NT-proBNP, N-terminal pro-BNP; TTE, transthoracic echocardiography. aIncluding blood pressure, heart rate, height, weight, and body mass index. bCardiac biomarkers (troponin and NP) should be measured in patients at risk of CTRCD where available and results should be interpreted according to the patient clinical status, type of cancer treatment, and kidney function. cConsider other CV complementary tests in selected patients: cardiac magnetic resonance, coronary computed tomography angiography, CPET (in selected patients for pre-operative [lung, colon, and rectal cancers] risk stratification). See Section 4.6. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

3 Cancer therapy-related

cardiovascular toxicity definitions

Several terminologies and definitions have previously been proposed to describe the spectrum of CTR-CVT, leading to inconsistencies in diagnosis and management. The need to harmonize these definitions has frequently been stated and recognized, and resulted in the recent international definitions of CTR-CVT1 supported by this guideline (Table 3; Supplementary data, Table S1). This document will focus on consensus definitions for cardiomyopathy and heart failure (HF), myocarditis, vascular toxicities, hypertension, cardiac arrhythmias, and corrected QT interval (QTc) prolongation. The definitions of other CTR-CVT, including pericardial and valvular heart diseases (VHDs), are the same as those used for the general cardiology population. For cardiac injury, cardiomyopathy, and HF, the descriptive term cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction (CTRCD) is recommended as it captures the broad spectrum of possible presentations and the aetiological link with the broad scope of various cancer therapies, including chemotherapy, targeted agents, immune therapies, and radiation therapy.

High

Intermediate

Low Severe and very severe

Moderate

Mild

Likelihood of

CTR-CVT Clinical severity of CTR-CVT

Figure 4 Dimensions of cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity risk and disease severity. CTR-CVT, cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity; CV, cardiovascular. The ultimate risk is the combination of the likelihood (based on reported incidence) and degree (severity or grade) of the adverse event. The most vulnerable patient groups are those at high likelihood of experiencing a severe adverse event. The level of attention that needs to be devoted to these patients varies accordingly. The risk and type of CTR-CVT, as well as the potential for reversibility, depends on different factors, listed in Figure 3, that should be considered to define global CV and oncological prognosis and to individualize CTR-CVT surveillance. Additional factors that add to the complexity of CTR-CVT risk assessment are the cancer type and prognosis, and type, duration, and intensity of cancer treatment. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

Table 3 Cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity definitions

CTRCD Symptomatic CTRCD (HF)a,b Very severe HF requiring inotropic support, mechanical circulatory support, or consideration of transplantation

Severe HF hospitalization Moderate Need for outpatient intensification of diuretic and HF therapy Mild Mild HF symptoms, no intensification of therapy required

Asymptomatic CTRCD Severe New LVEF reduction to ,40%

Moderate New LVEF reduction by ≥10 percentage points to an LVEF

of 40–49% OR New LVEF reduction by ,10 percentage points to an LVEF of 40– 49% AND either new relative decline in GLS by .15% from baseline OR new rise in cardiac biomarkersc

Mild LVEF ≥50% AND new relative decline in GLS by .15% from baseline

AND/OR new rise in cardiac biomarkersc

ICI myocarditis (either pathohistological diagnosis or clinical diagnosis) Pathohistological diagnosis (EMB) Multifocal inflammatory cell infiltrates with overt cardiomyocyte loss by light microscopy Clinical diagnosisd cTn elevation (new or significant change from baseline)e with 1 major criterion or 2 minor criteria, after exclusion of ACS and acute infectious myocarditis based on clinical suspicionf

Major criterion: • CMR diagnostic for acute myocarditis (modified Lake Louise criteria)g Minor criteria: • Clinical syndrome (including any one of the following: fatigue, myalgias, chest pain, diplopia, ptosis,

shortness of breath, orthopnoea, lower-extremity oedema, palpitations, light-headedness/dizziness, syncope, muscle weakness, cardiogenic shock) • Ventricular arrhythmia (including cardiac arrest) and/or new conduction system disease • Decline in LV systolic function, with or without regional wall motion abnormalities in a non-Takotsubo pattern • Other immune-related adverse events, particularly myositis, myopathy, myasthenia gravis • Suggestive CMRh

Severity of myocarditis • Fulminant: Haemodynamic instability, HF requiring non-invasive or invasive ventilation, complete or

high-grade heart block, and/or significant ventricular arrhythmia • Non-fulminant: including symptomatic but haemodynamically and electrically stable patients and incidental cases diagnosed at the same time as other immuno-related adverse events. Patients may have

reduced LVEF but no features of severe disease • Steroid refractory: non-resolving or worsening myocarditis (clinical worsening or persistent troponin elevation after exclusion of other aetiologies) despite high-dose methylprednisolone

Recovery from myocarditis • Complete recovery: Patients with complete resolution of acute symptoms, normalization of biomarkers, and recovery of LVEF after discontinuation of immunosuppression. CMR may still show LGE

or elevated T1 due to fibrosis, but any suggestion of acute oedema should be absent • Recovering: Ongoing improvement in patient clinical symptoms, signs, biomarkers, and imaging parameters, but not yet normalized, while on tapering doses of immunosuppression

Vascular toxicity (for general cardiology definitions, see Supplementary data, Table S1) Asymptomatic vascular toxicity CAD Symptomatic vascular toxicity Stroke

PAD Transient ischaemic attack Carotid artery disease MI Venous thrombosis ACS Arterial thrombosis CCS Peripheral vasoreactivity PAD

Continued Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

4 Cardiovascular toxicity risk

stratification before anticancer therapy

The optimal time to consider CVD prevention strategies in patients with cancer is at the time of cancer diagnosis and prior to the initiation of cancer treatment.4,5 This enables the oncology team to consider CV risk while making cancer treatment choices, educating patients regarding their CV risk, personalizing CV surveillance and follow-up strategies, and making appropriate referrals of high-risk patients to cardio-oncology services. These strategies are needed to mitigate CVD risk, and improve the adherence to effective cancer treatments and the overall survival. CVD prevention strategies require a personalized approach. Risk assessment is a challenging task and it is vital that clinicians adopt a systematic approach without delaying oncological treatment.12,21,22

Figure 5 provides a comprehensive approach to risk assessment. The choice of the cardiac tests (electrocardiogram [ECG], biomarkers, and imaging) should be individualized based on CV risk and the planned cancer treatments.

4.1 General approach to cardiovascular

toxicity risk in patients with cancer Pre-treatment CTR-CVT risk assessment should ideally be performed using a recognized risk stratification method where multiple risk factors are incorporated to determine patient-specific risk.23

Coronary epicardial vasoreactivity Vasospastic angina Coronary microvascular vasoreactivity Microvascular angina

Raynaud’s phenomenon

Arterial hypertension Treatment threshold for hypertension before, during, and after therapy In patients with high CV riski: ≥130 mmHg systolic and/or ≥80 mmHg diastolic

Otherwise: ≥140 mmHg systolic and/or ≥90 mmHg diastolic

Cancer therapy holding threshold ≥180 mmHg systolic and/or ≥110 mmHg diastolic Hypertensive emergency (Very high) BP elevation associated with acute hypertension-mediated organ damage (heart, retina, brain, kidneys, and large arteries), requiring immediate BP reduction to limit extension or promote regression of

target organ damage

Cardiac arrhythmias QT prolongation Prolonged: QTcF . 500 msj Bradycardia For general cardiology definitions, see Supplementary data, Table S1 Supraventricular tachycardia Ventricular arrhythmias AF © ESC 2022

ACS, acute coronary syndromes; AF, atrial fibrillation; BNP, B-type natriuretic peptide; BP, blood pressure; CAD, coronary artery disease; CCS, chronic coronary syndromes; CMR, cardiac magnetic resonance; cTn, cardiac troponin; CTRCD, cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction; CV, cardiovascular; ECV, extracellular volume fraction; EMB, endomyocardial biopsy; ESC, European Society of Cardiology; GLS, global longitudinal strain; HF, heart failure; HFmrEF, HF with mildly reduced ejection fraction; HFpEF, heart failure with preserved ejection fraction; HFrEF, heart failure with reduced ejection fraction; ICI, immune checkpoint inhibitors; LGE, late gadolinium enhancement; LV, left ventricular; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; MI, myocardial infarction; NT-proBNP, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide; PAD, peripheral artery disease; QTcF, corrected QT interval using Fridericia correction; SCORE2, Systematic Coronary Risk Estimation 2; SCORE2-OP, Systematic Coronary Risk Estimation 2—Older Persons. See Supplementary data, Table S1 for expanded definitions. aWith LVEF and supportive diagnostic biomarkers based on the 2021 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic HF.14 bSymptomatic CTRCD represents HF, which is a clinical syndrome consisting of cardinal symptoms (e.g. breathlessness, ankle swelling, and fatigue) that may be accompanied by signs (e.g. elevated jugular venous pressure, pulmonary crackles, and peripheral oedema) and has traditionally been divided into distinct phenotypes based on the measurement of LVEF: ≤40% = HFrEF; 41–49% = HFmrEF; ≥50% = HFpEF. ccTnI/cTnT . 99th percentile, BNP ≥35 pg/mL, NT-proBNP ≥125 pg/mL or new significant rise from baseline beyond the biological and analytical variation of the assay used. dClinical diagnoses should be confirmed with magnetic resonance imaging or EMB if possible and without causing treatment delays. Treatment with immunosuppression should be promptly initiated while awaiting further confirmatory testing in symptomatic patients. eBoth troponin I and troponin T can be used; however, clinical observations suggest that troponin T may be falsely elevated in patients with concomitant myositis and without myocarditis.15–17 fAccording to local protocols. gDiagnostic CMR: Based on updated Lake Louise criteria18: T2-based criterion + T1-based criterion + supportive criteria (T2-based criteria: regional or global increase of native T2, or T2signal intensity; T1-based criteria: regional or global increase of native T1, or regional or global increase in the ECV, or presence of LGE; supportive criteria: pericarditis and/or regional or global LV systolic dysfunction). hSuggestive CMR: meeting some but not all of the modified Lake Louise criteria. The presence of T2- or T1-based criteria may support a diagnosis of acute myocardial inflammation in the appropriate clinical scenario. iSCORE2 (,70 years), SCORE2-OP (≥70 years) or equivalent.19 CV risk stratification: ,50 years: low risk ,2.5%, moderate risk 2.5% to ,7.5%, high risk ≥7.5%; 50–69 years: low risk ,5%; moderate risk 5% to ,10%; high risk ≥10%; ≥70 years: low risk ,7.5%, moderate risk 7.5% to ,15%, high risk ≥15%. jQTcF 480–500 ms: correct reversible causes, minimize other QT prolonging medications, close QTcF monitoring. Fridericia correction is recommended (QTcF= QT/3√RR).20 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

Only a limited number of retrospective risk scores have been published in patients with cancer. Most of these scores have been developed for specific cancer-patient groups and cannot be readily applied or extrapolated to other type of malignancies.24–29 While further validation is needed, HFA-ICOS risk assessment tools should be considered to determine pre-treatment risk of CTR-CVT as they are easy to use and implement in oncology and haematology services (Table 4; Supplementary data, Tables S2–S7).12,13 Other CV risk

Physical and metabolic

assessmentb ECG (Class I) Pre-existing CVD or

at risk of CTRCDc

New, untreated or uncontrolled medical, and

lifestyle CVRF

Arrhythmias Prolonged QTcF

Check and correct precipitant factorsf

(Class I) Ref cardiologistg

(Class I) Ref rdiologist g

(Class I)

Suspected

CVD cTn and NP

increasedd TTE (LVEF and GLS)

reducede

Aggressive management of CVRF and pre-existing CVD according to ESC Guidelines Healthy lifestyle promotion

(Class I)

Baseline cardiovascular toxicity risk assessment

Consider primary vs secondary preventive strategies according to CV toxicity risk,

pre-existing CVD, and cancer treatment type

HFA-ICOS risk assessment: CVRFa CVD history Cancer history Cancer treatment history

Figure 5 Baseline cardiovascular toxicity risk assessment before anticancer therapy. BNP, B-type natriuretic peptide; cTn, cardiac troponin; CTRCD, cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction; CV, cardiovascular; CVD, CV disease; CVRF, CV risk factors; ECG, electrocardiogram; ESC, European Society of Cardiology; GLS, global longitudinal strain; HFA, Heart Failure Association; ICOS, International Cardio-Oncology Society; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; NP, natriuretic peptides (including BNP and NT-proBNP); NT-proBNP, N-terminal pro-BNP peptide; QTc, corrected QT interval; QTcF, corrected QT interval using Fridericia correction; TTE, transthoracic echocardiography. aWhen assessing CVRF, include information about unhealthy lifestyle including sedentary behaviour, smoking, and alcohol intake. bSee Figure 3. cAccording to cancer treatment and HFA-ICOS risk assessment. dcTnI/T . 99th percentile, BNP ≥35 pg/mL, NT-proBNP ≥125 pg/mL. ePatients with baseline LVEF , 50% or in the low normal range (LVEF 50–54%) should be referred to a specialized cardiologist or cardio-oncologist. When TTE is used, ideally three-dimensional-LVEF and GLS should be measured. If GLS assessment is not available, other markers of longitudinal function (e.g. annular Doppler velocity) should be considered. Cardiac magnetic resonance should be considered if echocardiography is of non-diagnostic quality. fAnaemia, infections, electrolyte abnormalities, metabolic problems, other QTc-prolonging drugs. gCardio-oncology referral is recommended when available; alternatively, patients should be referred to a specialized cardiologist with expertise in managing CVD in patients with cancer. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

Table 4 Heart Failure Association–International Cardio-Oncology Society baseline cardiovascular toxicity risk stratification

Baseline CV toxicity risk factors Anthracycline chemotherapy HER2-targeted

therapies VEGF inhibitors BCR-ABL inhibitors Multiple myeloma

therapies RAF and

MEK inhibitors

Previous CVD HF/cardiomyopathy/ CTRCD VH VH VH H VH VH Severe VHD H H – – – H MI or PCI or CABG H H VH – – H Stable angina H H VH – – H Arterial vascular disease – – VH VH VH – Abnormal ankle-brachial pressure index – – – H – – PH – – – H – – Arterial thrombosis with TKI – – – VH – – Venous thrombosis (DVT/PE) – – H M2 VH – Arrhythmiaa – M2 M2 M2 M2 M1 QTc ≥480 ms – – H H – – 450 ≤QTc , 480 ms (men); 460 ≤QTc , 480 ms (women) – – M2 M2 – – Prior PI CV toxicity – – – – VH – Prior IMiD CV toxicity – – – – H – Cardiac imaging LVEF , 50% H H H H H H LVEF 50–54% M2 M2 M2 – M2 M2 LV hypertrophy – – – – M1 – Cardiac amyloidosis – – – – VH – Cardiac biomarkers Elevated baseline cTnb M1 M2 M1 – M2 M2 Elevated baseline NPb M1 M2 M1 – H M2 Age and CVRF Age ≥80 years H H – – – M1 Age 65–79 years M2 M2 – – – M1 Age ≥75 years – – H H H M1 Age 65–74 years – – M1 M2 M1 M1 Age ≥60 years – – – M1 – – CVD 10-year risk score . 20% – – – H – – Hypertensionc M1 M1 H M2 M1 M2 Chronic kidney diseased M1 M1 M1 M1 M1 M1 Proteinuria – – M1 – – – DMe M1 M1 M1 M1 M1 M1 Hyperlipidaemiaf – – M1 M1 M1 – Family history of thrombophilia – – – M1 M1 –

Continued Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

calculators (e.g. SMART [Second manifestations of arterial disease] risk score, ADVANCE [Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron-MR Controlled Evaluation] risk score, SCORE2 [Systematic Coronary Risk Estimation 2], SCORE2-OP [Systematic Coronary Risk Estimation 2—Older Persons], ASCVD [AtheroSclerotic Cardiovascular Disease] risk score, U-Prevent, and lifetime risk calculators) may be considered at baseline for the assessment of CV risk, considering that cancer itself may increase the likelihood of CVD.19,23,30,31

Baseline risk assessment should be considered by the treating oncology or haematology team for all patients diagnosed with cancer who are scheduled to receive a cancer treatment identified to have a clinically significant level of CRT-CVT, or by a cardiologist if appropriate. In the case of patients scheduled to receive

Current cancer treatment Dexamethasone . 160 mg/ month – – – – M1 – Includes anthracycline before HER2-targeted therapy – M1g – – – – Previous exposure to Anthracycline H M2h H – H H Trastuzumab – VH – – – – RT to left chest or mediastinum H M2 M1 – M1 M2 Non-anthracycline chemotherapy M1 – – – – – Lifestyle risk factors Current smoker or significant smoking history M1 M1 M1 H M1 M1 Obesity (BMI . 30 kg/m2) M1 M1 M1 M1 M1 M1 © ESC 2022

AF, atrial fibrillation; BCR-ABL, breakpoint cluster region–Abelson oncogene locus; BMI, body mass index; BNP, B-type natriuretic peptide; BP, blood pressure; CABG, coronary artery bypass graft; cTn, cardiac troponin; CTRCD, cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction; CV, cardiovascular; CVD, cardiovascular disease; CVRF, cardiovascular risk factors; DM, diabetes mellitus; DVT, deep vein thrombosis; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; H, high risk; HbA1c, glycated haemoglobin; HER2, human epidermal receptor 2; HF, heart failure; IMiD, immunomodulatory drugs; LV, left ventricular; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; M, moderate risk; MEK, mitogen-activated extracellular signal-regulated kinase; MI, myocardial infarction; MM, multiple myeloma; NP, natriuretic peptides (including BNP and NT-proBNP); NT-proBNP, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention; PE, pulmonary embolism; PH, pulmonary hypertension; PI, proteasome inhibitors; QTc, corrected QT interval; RAF, rapidly accelerated fibrosarcoma; RT, radiotherapy; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitors; ULN, upper limit of normal; VEGFi, vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors; VH, very high risk; VHD, valvular heart disease. An expanded version of this table is provided in Supplementary data, Tables S2–S7. Risk level: Low risk = no risk factors OR one moderate1 risk factor; moderate risk (M) = moderate risk factors with a total of 2–4 points (Moderate 1 [M1] = 1 point; Moderate [M2] = 2 points); high risk (H) = moderate risk factors with a total of ≥5 points OR any high-risk factor; very-high risk (VH) = any very-high risk factor. aAF, atrial flutter, ventricular tachycardia, or ventricular fibrillation. bElevated above the ULN of the local laboratory reference range. cSystolic BP . 140 mmHg or diastolic BP . 90 mmHg, or on treatment. deGFR , 60 mL/min/1.73 m2. eHbA1c . 7.0% or .53 mmol/mol, or on treatment. fNon-high density lipoprotein cholesterol .3.8 mmol/L (.145 mg/dL) or on treatment. gHigh risk if anthracycline chemotherapy and trastuzumab delivered concurrently. hPrevious malignancy (not current treatment protocol).

Table 5 Anthracycline equivalence dose

Doxorubicin Epirubicin Daunorubicin Mitoxantrone Idarubicina

CV toxicity dose ratio 1 0.8 0.6 10.5 5 Isoequivalent dose 100 mg/m2 125 mg/m2 167 mg/m2 9.5 mg/m2 20 mg/m2 © ESC 2022

This table refers to anthracycline equivalence dose using doxorubicin as a reference. Note that these isoequivalent doses are derived from paediatric CS. CS, cancer survivors; CV, cardiovascular. aData for idarubicin are based upon an estimated anticancer efficacy ratio, not derived from cardiotoxicity data. The CV toxicity dose ratio provides the value that should be used to multiply the dose of the anthracycline of interest to convert to isoequivalent doses of doxorubicin; e.g. to convert 125 mg/m2 of epirubicin to doxorubicin isoequivalent, multiply the dose by 0.8 (125 mg/m2 × 0.8 = 100 mg/m2 of doxorubicin). Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

anthracycline chemotherapy, the total planned cumulative anthracycline dose is also relevant, and ≥250 mg/m2 of doxorubicin or equivalent should be considered higher risk (Table 5).32 CV risk stratification results should be discussed with the patient and documented in clinical notes. This process will also enable future validation of these tools. Cardiology referral (cardio-oncology programme or cardiologist with expertise in managing CVD in patients with cancer) is recommended for patients identified to be at high or very high risk for CTR-CVT at baseline (Table 4) to institute strategies to mitigate risk.33 Patients at moderate risk can benefit from closer cardiac monitoring, strict management of traditional CVRF, and selected moderate-risk patients may also benefit from a cardio-oncology referral (Figure 6). Low-risk patients can be followed within the oncology programme with appropriate referral to cardio-oncology if a CTR-CVT emerges or new or uncontrolled CVRF appear.

AND AND

AND AND

AND

CV risk stratification be f o

f f r e anticancer ther a p y

p

p

(Class I)

Com m unicate the CV t o xicity risk assessment r esults (Class I) Educate patients r ega r ding risks and p r otecti v e healt h y li f estyle (Class I)

f f

Management of CVRF and CVD acco r ding to ESC Guidelines (Class I)

H F A-ICOS baseline risk assessment

F F

(Class IIa)

L o w risk

Routine oncolo g y f oll

f f o w-up Moderate risk

Ca r diolo g y a r e f e

f f r ral if

CV t o xicity d e v elops

(Class I) Closer oncolo g y f oll

f f o w-up

Ca r diolo g y a r e f e

f f r ral if

CV t o xicity d e v elops

(Class I)

Ca r diolo g y r e f e

f f r ral a (Class IIb) Ca r diolo g y a r e f e

f f r ral (Class I)

Ca r diop r otecti v e strategies

(Class IIa)

Discussion of the risk/benefit

balance of ca r diot o xic anticancer t r eatment

(Class I)

H F A-ICOS

F F r esults

High/ v e r y high risk

Patient with cancer

Figure 6 General cardio-oncology approach after Heart Failure Association–International Cardio-Oncology Society cardiovascular toxicity risk assessment. CV, cardiovascular; CVD, CV disease; CVRF, CV risk factors; ESC, European Society of Cardiology; HFA, Heart Failure Association; ICOS, International Cardio-Oncology Society. aCardio-oncology referral is recommended when available; alternatively, patients should be referred to a specialized cardiologist with expertise in managing CVD in patients with cancer. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

4.2 History and clinical examination

A careful clinical history and physical examination is recommended as part of the baseline risk assessment. Oncology patients can be divided into two cohorts with respect to the presence or absence of pre-existing CVD. A primary prevention strategy can be considered in patients without previous CVD or CTR-CVT while secondary prevention includes interventions in patients with prior or active CVD or previous CTR-CVT.12

Reviewing traditional risk factors for CVD is recommended. Where present, the efficacy of treatment and control of these modifiable risk factors should be determined to ensure optimal control during cancer therapy.4,34 Although recent SCORE2 and SCORE2-OP19 tables are not focused on patients with cancer, risk calculation is recommended for patients with cancer .40 years of age (unless they are automatically categorized as being at high risk or very high risk based on documented CVD, diabetes mellitus [DM], kidney disease, or a highly elevated single risk factor) as a reference to optimize CVRF treatment goals.19,31,35 A family history of premature CVD should be considered because genetic abnormalities associated with CVD may predispose patients with cancer to a higher risk of CTR-CVT.36–38 Lifestyle factors such as smoking, alcohol consumption, sedentary lifestyle, exposure to pollution, and frailty are important shared risk factors for both cancer and CVD. Information on prior history of cancer, cardiotoxic cancer therapies, and their respective doses should be collected. Patients should be asked about typical cardiac symptoms (e.g. chest pain with activity, dyspnoea on exertion, orthopnoea, palpitations, and peripheral oedema), which can guide clinical examination and investigations. Physical examination should document vital signs and look for potential indicators of undiagnosed CVD such as HF, pericardial disease, VHD, and arrhythmias.39–42 The second scenario is secondary prevention in patients with a prior history of CVD. These patients with cancer are potentially at high or very high risk of future CV events,12 and require a more comprehensive clinical evaluation of their CVD, its severity, and prior and current treatments. Depending on the type and severity of CVD, additional investigations—including resting or stress echocardiography, cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR), nuclear perfusion imaging, and coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) —may be indicated to determine risk status. Identifying prior CVD should not automatically be a reason to withhold cancer therapy but considered an opportunity to optimize CV risk prior to and during treatment. Risk/benefit discussions should include the patient, oncologist or haematologist, and—where available—a specialized cardio-oncology service. Additional factors that add to the complexity of baseline CV risk assessment are the cancer type and prognosis, and type, duration, and intensity of cancer treatment (Figure 1).4,12,43 Clinical history, physical examination features, and treatment-related risk factors that contribute to CTR-CVT for various cancer therapies are summarized in Supplementary data, Table S8. These risk factors should be collected and considered along with baseline ECG, cardiac serum biomarkers, and cardiac imaging tests (summarized in Figure 7) to complete baseline CTR-CVT evaluation.

4.3 Electrocardiogram

A baseline 12-lead ECG is a readily available test that can provide important clues to underlying CVD. ECG evidence of chamber enlargement, conduction abnormalities, arrhythmias, ischaemia, or prior myocardial infarction (MI), and low voltages should be interpreted in the clinical context. A baseline ECG is recommended prior to starting a cancer treatment known to cause QTc prolongation.44–49 Measurement of QTc using the Fridericia correction (QTcF) is

Recommendation Table 1 — Recommendations for a general approach to cardiovascular toxicity risk categorization

Recommendations Classa Levelb CV toxicity risk stratificationc before starting potentially cardiotoxic anticancer therapy is recommended in all patients with cancer.12,14,19,21,25,28,31 I B Communicating the results of the CV toxicity risk assessment to the patient and other appropriate healthcare professionals is recommended. I C The use of HFA-ICOS risk assessment should be considered to stratify CV toxicity risk in patients with cancer scheduled to receive cardiotoxic anticancer therapy.12 IIa C It is recommended that patients categorized to be at low CV toxicity risk should proceed to anticancer therapy without delay. I C In patients categorized at moderate CV toxicity risk, cardiology referrald may be considered.e IIb C Cardiology referrald is recommended in high-risk and very high-risk patients before anticancer therapy.f I C Discussion of the risk/benefit balance of cardiotoxic anticancer treatment in high- and very high-risk patients in a multidisciplinary approach prior to starting treatment is recommended. I C Cardiology referrald is recommended for patients with cancer and pre-existing CVD or abnormal findings at baseline CV toxicity risk assessmentg who require potentially cardiotoxic anticancer therapy. I C © ESC 2022

CV, cardiovascular; CVD, CV disease; ECG, electrocardiogram; GLS, global longitudinal strain; HbA1c, glycated haemoglobin; HFA, Heart Failure Association; ICOS, International Cardio-Oncology Society; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; TTE, transthoracic echocardiography; ULN, upper limit of normal; VHD, valvular heart disease. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cIncluding clinical history and physical examination, ECG, general blood test, HbA1c, lipid profile, and cardiac serum biomarkers and/or TTE (according to cancer drug type and CV toxicity risk). dCardio-oncology referral is recommended when available; alternatively, the patients should be referred to a specialized cardiologist with expertise in managing CVD in patients with cancer. eWithout delaying cancer treatments. fUnless there is an oncology emergency requiring immediate cancer treatment. gModerate-to-severe pre-existing CVDs or new abnormal findings (baseline cardiac serum biomarkers . ULN, LVEF ≤50%, GLS under normal local values, previously undiagnosed moderate-to-severe myocardial, pericardial, or VHDs, abnormal baseline ECG). Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

HER2-targeted ther a pies c

Baseline clinical CV assessment , p

, h ysical exam and ECG a r e r ecommended

in all cancer patients scheduled f or ca

f f r diot o xic ther a pies a

Previous CVD

Previous CVD

All other patients

All patients

All patients

All other patients

Previous CVD

All patients

High and very high risk Moderate risk Low risk Other conditions Class IIb Class IIa Class I

Anthracyclines

Fluo r o p y r ymidines

VEGFi

Second- and thi r d-generation BCR-ABL TKI d

BTK inhibitors

PI e

RAF and MEK inhibitors

ICI

Osime r tinib

C AR-T and TIL

R T to a R R v olume including the hea r t

HSCT TTEb Patient risk level NP cTn

Figure 7 Baseline screening recommendations for patients with cancer treated with potentially cardiotoxic drugs. 3D, three-dimensional; ADT, androgen deprivation therapy; AL-CA, amyloid light-chain cardiac amyloidosis; BC, breast cancer; BCR-ABL, breakpoint cluster region-Abelson oncogene locus; BNP, B-type natriuretic peptide; BTK, Bruton tyrosine kinase; CAR-T, chimeric antigen receptor T cell; CDK, cyclin-dependent kinase; CMR, cardiac magnetic resonance; cTn, cardiac troponin; CV, cardiovascular; CVD, cardiovascular disease; ECG, electrocardiogram; GLS, global longitudinal strain; HER2, human epidermal receptor 2; HSCT, haematopoietic stem cell transplantation; ICI, immune checkpoint inhibitors; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; MEK, mitogen-activated extracellular signal-regulated kinase; NP, natriuretic peptides (including BNP and NT-proBNP); NT-proBNP, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide; PI, proteasome inhibitors; RAF, rapidly accelerated fibrosarcoma; RT, radiotherapy; TIL, tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitors; TTE, transthoracic echocardiography; VEGFi, vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors. aIncluding patients scheduled to receive ADT for prostate cancer, CDK 4/6 inhibitors, endocrine hormone therapy for BC and anaplastic lymphoma kinase inhibitors. bTTE is recommended as the first-line modality for the assessment of cardiac function. 3D echocardiography is recommended to measure LVEF. GLS is recommended in all patients with cancer having echocardiography, if available. CMR should be considered when echocardiography is unavailable or not diagnostic. cBaseline cTn measurement should be considered (Class IIa, Level A) in low- and moderate-risk patients post-anthracycline chemotherapy but prior to starting HER2-targeted therapies. Baseline NP and cTn measurement may be considered (Class IIb, Level C) in low- and moderate-risk patients. dBaseline echocardiography is recommended in patients scheduled to receive dasatinib (Class I, Level C). eNP and cTn measurements are recommended at baseline in patients with AL-CA (Class I, Level B). Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

recommended.44–48 When baseline QTcF prolongation is recognized, the correction of reversible causes and the identification of genetic conditions that prolong QT is recommended (see Section 6.4.2).45 Left atrial enlargement on baseline ECG before ibrutinib has been shown to be a predictor for the development of atrial fibrillation (AF) during chemotherapy.50,51 The presence of atrioventricular (AV) conduction delays and premature atrial complexes are associated with the development of atrial arrhythmias in patients undergoing autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT).52

4.4 Cardiac serum biomarkers

The literature on the use of biomarkers for CTR-CVT risk stratification before cancer therapy is limited, and recommendations are mostly based on expert opinion.12,43,53–55 Four recent position papers based on collaboration among the Cardio-Oncology Study Group of the HFA of the ESC, the ESC-CCO, and ICOS have suggested that measurement of cardiac serum biomarkers—cardiac troponin (cTn) I or T and natriuretic peptides (NP) (e.g. B-type natriuretic peptide [BNP] or N-terminal pro-BNP [NT-proBNP])—help in baseline CV risk stratification of patients scheduled for cancer therapies including anthracyclines, human epidermal receptor 2 (HER2)-targeted therapies, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors (VEGFi), proteasome inhibitors (PI), immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), chimeric antigen receptor T cell (CAR-T) and tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) therapies, allowing identification of those who may benefit from cardioprotective therapy.12,43,53,54 Baseline cardiac serum biomarker measurements are required if the degree of change in the biomarkers is to be used to identify subclinical cardiac injury during cancer treatment. A few studies of paediatric and adult patients requiring anthracycline chemotherapy have reported that patients with cancer with an increased cTn before treatment were more likely to develop CTRCD.56–58 However, most published studies have not reported on the prognostic value of baseline cTn measurements, possibly due to the low prevalence of patients with previous CVD or CVRF in these studies.55,59,60 A study of 251 women receiving trastuzumab for early HER2-positive breast cancer (BC) reported that 19% of the patients who developed cardiac dysfunction during trastuzumab therapy had positive ultrasensitive troponin I at baseline (.80 ng/L).61 Furthermore, baseline high cTnI level was a predictor of lack of recovery despite optimal HF therapy.61 These findings have been confirmed in a subsequent study of 533 patients with BC who had serial high-sensitivity cTn (hs-cTn) I and T measurements during trastuzumab therapy.62 Increased baseline cTn (.40 ng/L and .14 ng/L for hs-cTnI and hs-cTnT, respectively) was associated with a four-fold risk of developing LV dysfunction (LVD).62

However, given the high proportion of patients with previous anthracycline exposure in both studies, these elevated cTn levels are not a true baseline as they reflect pre-trastuzumab but postanthracycline chemotherapy. It is unclear whether pretreatment cTn levels will be predictive of LVD in patients before any treatment, or for those BC patients treated with trastuzumab without prior anthracyclines. NP are another potential biomarker for CV risk stratification. Several studies have shown the role of NP measurement at baseline or NP changes to predict future CTR-CVT.63–65 In patients with multiple myeloma (MM), pre-treatment NP may be a predictive marker for subsequent CV adverse events. In 109 patients with relapsed MM, BNP . 100 pg/mL or NT-proBNP . 125 pg/mL levels before initiation of carfilzomib were associated with an odds ratio of 10.8 for subsequent CV adverse events.66 Therefore, baseline NP measurement is recommended in high- and very high-risk patients and should be considered in low- and moderate-risk patients before PI treatment. Baseline elevated values of CV functional peptides (including NT-proBNP) and hs-cTnT were strongly related to all-cause mortality in 555 patients with different types of tumours, suggesting that the presence of a subclinical myocardial injury might be directly linked to disease progression.67 However, in the CARDIOTOX (CARDIOvascular TOXicity induced by cancer-related therapies) registry, in 855 patients treated with a range of oncological treatments, including radiotherapy (RT), both NT-proBNP and cTn elevation at baseline were not associated with the development of severe CTRCD (LVEF , 40% or clinical HF).68 There has also been interest in other novel biomarkers for CTR-CVT risk stratification before cancer treatment; however, the literature is limited. Candidates include myeloperoxidase, C-reactive protein, galectin-3, arginine–nitric oxide metabolites, growth differentiation factor-15, placental growth factor, fms-like tyrosine kinase-1, micro-ribonucleic acids, and immunoglobulin E.60,69–71 Currently, there is no evidence to support routine measurement of these novel biomarkers and more research is required.

Recommendation Table 2 — Recommendations for electrocardiogram baseline assessment

Recommendations Classa Levelb

An ECG is recommended in all patients starting cancer therapy as part of their baseline CV risk assessment. I C In patients with an abnormal baseline ECG,c referral to a cardiologistd is recommended. I C © ESC 2022

AF, atrial fibrillation; CV, cardiovascular; ECG, electrocardiogram; LV, left ventricular; QTc, corrected QT interval; QTcF, corrected QT interval using Fridericia correction. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cAdvanced conduction disease (left bundle branch block, right bundle branch block, second degree heart block, severe first degree heart block with a PR interval .300 ms); Q waves in two or more contiguous leads; LV hypertrophy; AF/atrial flutter if previously undiagnosed; QTc prolongation using Fridericia correction formula (QTcF = QT/3√RR) .450 ms for men and .460 ms for women or other ECG abnormality raising concern. dCardio-oncology referral is recommended when available; alternatively, the patients should be referred to a specialized cardiologist with expertise in managing CVD in patients with cancer. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

4.5 Cardiovascular imaging

CV imaging has an important role in identifying patients with subclinical CVD, determining the degree of pre-existing cardiac comorbidity prior to decisions regarding cancer therapy, and serves as a reference for identification of changes during treatment and long-term followup.12,54,72–74 Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) is the preferred imaging technique for baseline risk stratification as it provides quantitative assessment of LV and right ventricular (RV) function, chamber dilation, LV hypertrophy, regional wall motion abnormalities, diastolic function, VHD, pulmonary arterial pressure (PAP), and pericardial disease, which may influence the therapeutic decision.22,72 Suggestions for the components of a baseline echocardiography study are provided in Figure 8. Current definitions of CTRCD are based on a reduction of LVEF and/or relative changes in global longitudinal strain (GLS) (Table 3). Three-dimensional (3D) echocardiography is the preferred echocardiography modality for the assessment of LVEF and cardiac

Recommendation Table 3 — Recommendation for cardiac biomarker assessment prior to potentially cardiotoxic therapies

Recommendation Classa Levelb Baseline measurement of NPc and/or cTnd is recommended in all patients with cancer at risk of CTRCD if these biomarkers are going to be measured during treatment to detect CTRCD.e,53,55 I C © ESC 2022

cTn, cardiac troponin; CTRCD, cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction; NP, natriuretic peptides. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cNPs including B-type natriuretic peptide or N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide. dcTn includes any of troponin I, troponin T, or hs-cTnT. eSpecific recommendations for baseline cardiac biomarkers in patients with cancer at low, moderate, high, and very high risk of cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity are included in Section 5.

TTE Left ventricle-left atriuma

TTE

LVV and LV mass 3D-LVEF (2D-LVEF if 3D not available) Contrast echo if inadequate TTE image quality GLS E/e ́, LAV

RVV RVEF CMR

Right ventricle-right atriuma

RV dimensions S ́ TAPSE FAC RV-FWLS RA area Peak TRV

LVV and LV mass LVEF LS and circumferential strain if available

Myocardial Characterization T2w (STIR), T1, T2 maps, LGE

CMR

Valvular and pericardial diseases

IVC diameter, and respiratory changes Valvular and pericardial diseases Other parameters

TTE CMR

Figure 8 Recommended transthoracic echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging parameters in the evaluation of patients with cancer. 2D, two-dimensional; 3D, three-dimensional; BP, blood pressure; CMR, cardiac magnetic resonance; E, mitral inflow early diastolic velocity obtained by pulsed wave; e′, early diastolic velocity of the mitral annulus obtained by tissue doppler imaging; echo, echocardiography; FAC, fractional area change; FWLS, free wall longitudinal strain; GLS, global longitudinal strain; IVC, inferior vena cava; LAV, left atrial volume; LGE, late gadolinium enhancement; LS, longitudinal strain; LV, left ventricular; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; LVV, left ventricular volume; RA, right atrial; RV, right ventricular; RVEF, right ventricular ejection fraction; RVV, right ventricular volume; s′, systolic velocity of tricuspid annulus obtained by doppler tissue imaging; STIR, short tau inversion recovery; TAPSE, tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion; TTE, transthoracic echocardiography; TRV, tricuspid regurgitation velocity. aChanges in systemic arterial BP and loading conditions may influence cardiac function measurements. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

volumes.54,75–79 If 3D echocardiography is not feasible (e.g. unavailable or poor tracking), the modified two-dimensional (2D) Simpson’s biplane method is recommended.80,81 In patients with inadequate TTE image quality, ultrasound-enhancing contrast agents should be added to improve evaluation of LV function and volumes if two or more LV segments are not well visualized.82 Alternatively, in subjects with poor-quality echocardiography windows, when available, CMR should be considered (Figure 8).14,72,83,84 If TTE and CMR are both unavailable for the assessment of LVEF, multigated acquisition nuclear imaging (MUGA) can be considered as a third-line modality. MUGA scans should be avoided whenever possible due to radiation exposure and the inability to obtain other important information (e.g. VHD, PAP, or GLS). Baseline LVEF and GLS are recommended in all patients evaluated with TTE before cardiotoxic cancer treatment initiation to stratify CTR-CVT risk and to identify significant changes during treatment.8,64 Changes in loading conditions occur frequently during chemotherapy (e.g. volume increase due to intravenous [i.v.] fluids, volume loss due to vomiting or diarrhoea, blood pressure [BP] and heart rate changes with pain or stress) and may affect cardiac volumes, LVEF, and GLS quantification. Systemic arterial BP measurement is recommended with all resting TTE as it can influence cardiac function measurements and should be recorded on the TTE report. A baseline borderline (50–54%) or reduced (,50%) LVEF is a risk factor for future CTR-CVT from most cardiotoxic cancer therapies, in particular with anthracyclines or trastuzumab.12,24,74 Increased baseline indexed LV end-diastolic volume can be a predictor of major CV events (symptomatic HF or cardiac death) during anthracycline chemotherapy in patients with preserved LVEF.85 A normal LVEF does not exclude CTRCD and deformation parameters can detect early systolic impairment with sufficient test reliability.86–89 Determination of GLS using speckle tracking is recommended at baseline, using three apical views,90 particularly in moderate- and high-risk patients. Baseline GLS can predict LVD89–94 in patients receiving anthracyclines and/or trastuzumab. Strain measurements may be subject to inter-vendor variability95 and serial GLS measurement for each patient is recommended to be performed using the same machine/software. A median GLS change of 13.6% predicted a future fall in LVEF with a 95% upper limit of GLS reduction of 15%.93 Using the 15% cut-off improves specificity and is therefore the threshold recommended when monitoring GLS during cancer therapy. Global circumferential strain96 has been reported to identify patients at risk of CTRCD, but data are currently insufficient to recommend its use routinely. Baseline LV diastolic function may be associated with a small risk of subsequent systolic dysfunction, especially with anthracyclines and trastuzumab, although the evidence is not consistent.97,98 Chest computed tomography (CT) or CMR may be helpful for identifying subclinical CVD such as coronary calcium or intracardiac masses on readily available routine imaging performed for cancer staging.99 In the secondary prevention setting or patients with symptoms or signs of pre-existing CVD, a careful evaluation should begin with a comprehensive TTE.73 This is both to obtain baseline assessment as in the primary prevention setting and to determine the severity of the underlying CVD. In case of poor-quality or uninterpretable TTE images, or if a specific CVD is identified (e.g. hypertrophic cardiomyopathy), CMR should be considered for further risk assessment.

Functional imaging tests for myocardial ischaemia—including stress echocardiography, perfusion CMR, or nuclear myocardial perfusion imaging—should be performed to assess for ischaemia in symptomatic patients (stable angina, limiting dyspnoea) if clinical suspicion of coronary artery disease (CAD) exists, especially prior to use of cancer therapies associated with vascular toxicity (e.g. fluoropyrimidines, VEGFi, breakpoint cluster region–Abelson oncogene locus [BCR-ABL], tyrosine kinase inhibitors [TKI]). Alternatively, in patients with low to intermediate pre-test probability of CAD, CCTA is a robust alternate modality with high sensitivity to rule out obstructive CAD.100,101

4.6 Cardiopulmonary fitness assessment

Maximal cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) assesses the integrative capacity of the CV system to transport oxygen and energy substrate to skeletal muscle during exercise,109 described as cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF). CPET can therefore provide a more global assessment of CV health than organ-specific tools. CPET-derived

Recommendation Table 4 — Recommendations for cardiac imaging modalities in patients with cancer

General Classa Levelb

Echocardiography is recommended as the first-line modality for the assessment of cardiac function in patients with cancer.4,12,54,94 I C 3D echocardiography is recommended as the preferred echocardiographic modality to measure LVEF.77–79,89 I B GLS is recommended in all patients with cancer having echocardiography, if available.75,80,81,89,90,92,93,102,103 I C CMR should be considered for the assessment of cardiac function when echocardiography is unavailable or non-diagnostic.83,104,105 IIa C MUGA may be considered when TTE is not diagnostic and CMR is not available.106–108 IIb C Baseline cardiac imaging prior to potentially cardiotoxic therapiesc Baseline comprehensive TTE is recommended in all patients with cancer at high risk and very high risk of CV toxicity before starting anticancer therapy.d,54 I C © ESC 2022

3D, three-dimensional; CMR, cardiac magnetic resonance; CTR-CVT, cancer therapy-related CV toxicity; CV, cardiovascular; GLS, global longitudinal strain; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; MUGA, multigated acquisition nuclear imaging; TTE, transthoracic echocardiography. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cSpecific recommendations for baseline CV imaging in patients with cancer at low or moderate risk of CTR-CVT are included in Section 5. dExcept asymptomatic patients referred to breakpoint cluster region-Abelson oncogene locus therapy (BCR-ABL) where baseline TTE should be considered (see Figure 7 and Section 5.5.5). Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

CRF—typically measured as the peak rate of oxygen consumption110,111 or metabolic equivalents111,112 during exercise—is one of the most robust predictors of CV health and longevity,113,114 and improves risk classification.115–121 Evidence for CPET pretreatment is limited to pre-operative risk stratification particularly for patients with lung,122 colon,123 and rectal124 cancers. Whether CPET performed prior to cardiotoxic cancer therapies is prognostic of future CV events is unknown.

4.7 Cardiovascular risk evaluation

before cancer surgery Cancer surgery remains the primary treatment modality for many cancers. Cardio-oncology teams should be involved in pre-operative CV risk stratification to identify and provide appropriate management and surveillance of the potential risk factors.5 In patients undergoing oncological surgery, peri-operative cardiac complications are determined by patient-related risk factors, the tumour type, concomitant cancer therapies, and the expected surgical risk. To ensure safe cancer surgery, consultations should be directed at: (1) patients with previous significant or symptomatic CVD; (2) patients at high and very high CV toxicity risk, according to baseline HFA-ICOS risk assessment tools,12 when adjuvant (post-surgery) cancer treatment is planned; and (3) patients who have received neoadjuvant (prior to surgery) cancer therapy that is potentially cardiotoxic. Pre-operative clinical evaluation should not delay surgery. Complementary tests required for the patients included in groups 1 and 2 should be guided by general ESC Guidelines.125 However, in group 3 patients, the preoperative evaluation should be aimed at confirming that no relevant events have occurred during CV monitoring (Section 5). Table 6 summarizes factors that could influence peri-operative risk during cancer surgery.

4.8 Genetic testing

Candidate gene and genome-wide association studies have resulted in the identification of 40 candidate genes and single nucleotide polymorphisms associated with anthracycline-related cardiac dysfunction.37,126–128 It should be noted that with the advent of immunotherapies, germline genes may not be the only genetic predispositions to CTR-CVT. A study of patients with ICI-associated myocarditis identified that the selective clonal T-cell populations infiltrating the myocardium were identical to those present in tumours and skeletal muscle, with ribonucleic acid sequencing studies revealing expression of cardiac-specific genes in the tumour,129

raising the intriguing possibility that somatic mutations in the tumour itself could contribute to CTR-CVT. A list of genetic variants associated with CVD during cancer therapy is provided (Supplementary data, Table S9) and has recently been reviewed.38 Routine use of genetic testing for the assessment of CTR-CVT risk prior to initiation of cancer therapy is not currently recommended. In the future, a personalized genetic approach may help define individual susceptibility to CVD in patients with cancer and more research is required.

5 Prevention and monitoring of

cardiovascular complications during cancer therapy

5.1 General principles

CTR-CVT risk may vary according to cancer type and stage, anticancer drugs, doses, and underlying comorbidities. Certain therapy combinations (drug–drug or drug–radiation) may have a synergistically toxic effect on the heart, possibly depending on the timing of these therapies (sequential or concomitant) and previous comorbidities. The pathophysiology of CTR-CVT is out of the scope of this guideline and is extensively reviewed in the ESC CardioMed textbook.130 CVD and cancer share common modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors (Figure 3).4,131,132 The first step is to optimize lifestyle CVRF, smoking cessation, restricting alcohol consumption to a maximum of 100 g per week, and maintaining adequate physical activity.30 Exercise prescription seems to be a promising treatment to

Table 6 Factors that could influence peri-operative risk during cancer surgery and preventive strategies

Factors that could influence peri-operative risk during cancer surgery Preventive strategies

Patient-related factors • Lifestyle risk factors: smoking, obesity, sedentary lifestyle

• Poorly controlled CVRF: hypertension, DM • Pre-existing CVD including CTR-CVT • Cardiac medications that increase peri-operative bleeding risk (e.g. antiplatelets and anticoagulants) • Historical primary malignancy • Current cancer type, stage and location • Optimal management of CVRF and

CVD (Section 5) • Optimize VTE and ATE preventive

strategies (Section 6)

Neoadjuvant cancer therapy • Neoadjuvant cardiotoxic cancer treatments (see Section 5; especially anthracycline

chemotherapy and/or trastuzumab, ICI, VEGFi, fluoropyrimidine, and thoracic RT) • Cancer treatments that increase peri-operative bleeding risk (e.g. VEGFi, BTK inhibitors) • Thrombocytopaenia caused by cancer treatment • Ensure optimal CV monitoring of

neoadjuvant therapy (Section 5) • Optimize VTE and ATE preventive

strategies (Section 6) © ESC 2022

ATE, arterial thromboembolism; BTK, Bruton tyrosine kinase; CTR-CVT, cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity; CV, cardiovascular; CVD, cardiovascular disease; CVRF, cardiovascular risk factors; DM, diabetes mellitus; ICI, immune checkpoint inhibitors; RT, radiotherapy; VEGFi, vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors; VTE, venous thromboembolism. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

counteract anticancer treatment side effects and different types of training can be prescribed during cancer therapy according to a patient’s individual characteristics.133 A healthy lifestyle decreases the risks of cancer, CVD, and transition from diagnosed cancer to subsequent CVD.134,135 Poor CRF is associated with a higher prevalence of acute and chronic CTR-CVT and exercise positively impacts CRF during chemotherapy, although in a recent meta-analysis, the ability of exercise to prevent CTRCD is unclear.136,137 CVRF must be corrected with intensive treatment of arterial hypertension,138 DM,139 and

Management of CVD and CVRF

according to ESC Guidelines Primary vs secondary prevention

Minimize the use of cardiotoxic drugs

ACE-I/ARB and beta-blockers

Dexrazoxane/liposomal anthracyclines

(patients treated with anthracyclines)

Statins

Primary and secondary cancer-therapy related CV toxicity prevention strategies

In patients at high and very high

risk of CTRCD

1°prevention Baseline CV risk

assessment

2°prevention

1st cancer requiring cardiotoxic cancer therapy 2nd cancer requiring cardiotoxic cancer therapy CVD CTR-CVT Class IIa Class I

Figure 9 Primary and secondary cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity prevention. ACE-I, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors; ARB, angiotensin receptor blockers; CV, cardiovascular; CVD, cardiovascular disease; CVRF, cardiovascular risk factors; CTR-CVT, cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity; CTRCD, cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction; ESC, European Society of Cardiology.12 Left panel represents examples of five different primary or secondary prevention strategies definition based on the history of pre-existing CVD and/or prior CTR-CVT. Right panel describes general strategies to mitigate CTR-CVT risk in patients at high and very high risk of CTRCD. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

dyslipidaemia,140 and underlying CVD and modifiable comorbidities should be managed according to appropriate 2021 ESC Guidelines on CVD prevention in clinical practice (Figure 9).19 Special attention should also be paid to the polypharmacy frequently seen in patients with cancer, reducing the use of drugs that may interfere with cancer therapies to the essential and actively monitoring their CV side effects and drug–drug interactions.141 Electrolyte imbalances such as hypokalaemia and hypomagnesaemia should be corrected. The CV risk management plan should be shared with the cancer specialist team, the primary care physician, and the patient to coordinate treatment strategies.

5.2 Primary prevention strategies

Primary prevention of CTR-CVT aims to avoid or minimize the development of CV damage due to therapy in patients without CVD12,142 and requires a multidisciplinary team (MDT) discussion between oncologists and cardiologists for complex patients with cancer with multiple comorbidities.4,21,22,43,143,144

5.2.1 Primary prevention of cancer

therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity during anthracycline chemotherapy Neurohormonal therapies during anthracycline chemotherapy (with or without subsequent trastuzumab treatment) reduced the risk of significant LVEF decline during follow-up in several small randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (Supplementary data, Table S10).145–154 Recent meta-analyses including patients with cancer treated with anthracycline chemotherapy and HER2-targeted therapies reported that renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system blockers, beta-blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists have a significant benefit in preventing LVEF reduction, but no statistical differences in the incidence of overt HF or other clinical outcomes were demonstrated (Supplementary data, Table S11).155–160 This may be due, in part, to the fact that most trials included patients with a low baseline CTRCD risk and therefore larger RCTs are needed in high-risk populations. From the oncological perspective, some strategies that have been investigated include managing anthracycline-related toxicity by adjusting the infusion time and dose intensity.161 Dexrazoxane and liposomal anthracyclines are currently approved in patients with high and very high CTRCD risk or who have already received high cumulative anthracyclines doses.158,162–167 Dexrazoxane is protective against anthracycline-induced CTRCD. Currently, dexrazoxane is formally approved in adult patients with advanced or metastatic BC who have already received a minimum cumulative anthracycline dose of 300 mg/m2 of doxorubicin or equivalent (Table 5; Supplementary data, Table S12).163 In clinical practice, dexrazoxane infusion (dosage ratio dexrazoxane/doxorubicin is 10/1; e.g. 500 mg/m2 dexrazoxane per 50 mg/m2 doxorubicin) should be considered (at least 30 min prior to each anthracycline cycle) in adult patients with cancer scheduled to receive a high total cumulative anthracycline dose for curative treatment, and in patients with high and very high CTRCD risk (including those with pre-existing HF or low-normal or reduced LVEF) where anthracycline chemotherapy is deemed essential.163 Pegylated and non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin164,165,168

modify pharmacokinetics and tissue distribution without compromising antitumour efficacy. Pegylated and non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin are approved for metastatic BC and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin is also approved for advanced ovarian cancer, acquired immune deficiency syndrome-related Kaposi sarcoma, and MM. In a recent meta-analysis of 19 trials, in both the adjuvant and metastatic context, liposomal doxorubicin was reported to be less cardiotoxic than conventional doxorubicin.165 Liposomal daunorubicin is also available for acute leukaemia patients in place of daunorubicin when pre-existing LVD is present.164,165

5.2.2 Primary prevention of radiation-induced

cardiovascular toxicity Primary prevention of RT-induced damage to the CV system depends on technological advances that allow improved targeting of RT delivery, thereby maintaining or increasing oncological efficacy while reducing CTR-CVT.169,170 Modern techniques strive to minimize the mean heart dose (MHD), either by shaping the dose distribution (intensity-modulated RT) or by using respiratory management (gating or breath-hold).171,172 Proton therapy offers the potential to further decrease exposure to surrounding healthy organs.173 However, complete cardiac avoidance is not always possible due to the proximity of the tumour (e.g. central lung tumours, mediastinal lymphomas, irradiation of the internal mammary chain in BC). In patients where RT only has a consolidating role and the risk of RT-induced CV injury is very high (e.g. due to baseline risk factors), a MDT is needed to consider the risk/benefit of RT.171,174 There are no proven medical therapies to prevent RT-induced CV toxicity. One component of RT-induced CV toxicity is accelerating pre-existing CAD, and therefore tight control of CVRFs is recommended.

Recommendation Table 5 — Recommendations for primary prevention of cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity

Recommendations Classa Levelb

Management of CVRF according to the 2021 ESC Guidelines on CVD prevention in clinical practice is recommended before,c during, and after cancer therapy.19 I C Dexrazoxane should be considered in adult patients with cancer at high and very high CV toxicity risk when anthracycline chemotherapy is indicated.d,158 IIa B Liposomal anthracyclines should be considered in adult patients with cancer at high and very high CV toxicity risk when anthracycline chemotherapy is indicated.e,164,165,168 IIa B

Continued Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

5.3 Secondary prevention strategies

Secondary prevention refers to interventions in patients with preexisting CVD, including prior CTR-CVT, and new emerging CTR-CVT during cancer therapy. CVD and comorbidities should receive the optimal therapy before and during cancer therapy as discussed in previous sections. Regular clinical assessments, physical examinations, and CV investigations (including 12-lead ECG, TTE, and cardiac biomarkers) are recommended in patients receiving specific cardiotoxic cancer therapies, with the frequency of surveillance guided by baseline risk and the emergence of new CTR-CVT.5,12,33,53,54,187–190 5.4 Cardiovascular surveillance during

cancer therapies A careful clinical evaluation and physical examination is recommended during cancer treatment to detect early signs and symptoms of CTR-CVT. ECG monitoring is required in patients at risk of cardiac arrhythmias according to specific drug protocols.

5.4.1 Cardiac serum biomarkers

During therapy, NP and cTn should be used for CTRCD screening and diagnosis and they may also serve to guide therapy.55,63,191–194 The release of cTn and NP differ for different cancer treatments. Therefore, an increase in biomarker level should be interpreted in the patient clinical context (cancer treatment timing and comorbidities). It is important to consider that generally accepted cut-offs and reference values of CV biomarkers have not been established for patients with cancer or for those who receive cancer therapies. In addition, levels of NP and cTn may differ according to local laboratories and may be altered by many factors, including age, sex, renal function, obesity, infections, and comorbidities such as AF and pulmonary embolism (PE).53,63,195–197

5.4.2 Cardiac imaging

Cardiac imaging plays a critical role in clinical decision-making during the cancer process.72,198 Imaging techniques—particularly advanced echocardiography and CMR—facilitate early diagnosis and management of CTR-CVT.22,54,94 The frequency of cardiac imaging monitoring during therapy should be adapted according to the estimated baseline risk12 and the expected CTR-CVT manifestation.54 The cardiac imaging technique used should be based on local expertise and availability, and the same imaging modality (i.e. 3D-TTE, 2D-TTE, CMR) is recommended throughout the entire treatment to decrease inter-technique variability.94,199,200 Cardiac imaging should be performed at any time if patients receiving cardiotoxic therapies present with new cardiac symptoms. New definitions of CTRCD are presented in Section 3.1 Early recognition of asymptomatic CTRCD allows clinicians to incorporate cardioprotective therapy before there is a significant decline in LVEF, which may or may not be reversible, and also decreases the risk of interruptions in cancer therapy, which could otherwise affect patients’ survival.22,43,72,94 For the diagnosis and management of asymptomatic CTRCD during cancer treatment, TTE—including 3D-LVEF and GLS assessment—is the preferred technique to detect and confirm cardiac dysfunction.72,83,93,102 GLS evaluation is particularly important in patients with low-normal LVEF to confirm or not asymptomatic myocardial damage.201 It is recommended to use the same vendor to analyse GLS during cancer treatment to accurately compare values over time.73 Therefore, a relative change in GLS has been suggested as the ideal tool to identify asymptomatic mild CTRCD.1,4,94 Different thresholds have been considered in the literature in recent years.93,202,203 Currently, a relative GLS decrease of .15% compared with baseline is the recommended threshold as it reflects the 95% upper

Recommendation Table 6 — Recommendation for secondary prevention of cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity

Recommendation Classa Levelb

Management of CVD according to applicable ESC Guidelines is recommended before,c during, and after cancer therapy. I C © ESC 2022

CVD, cardiovascular disease; ESC, European Society of Cardiology. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cWithout delaying cancer treatments.

ACE-I or ARB and beta-blockers recommended for HFf should be considered for primary prevention in high- and very high-risk patients receiving anthracyclines and/or anti-HER2 therapies.145,150,155–157,159,160,175 IIa B ACE-I or ARB and beta-blockers recommended for HFf should be considered for primary prevention in high- and very high-risk patients receiving targeted cancer therapies that may cause HF.g IIa C Statins should be considered for primary prevention in adult patients with cancer at high and very high CV toxicity risk.h,149,176–185 IIa B © ESC 2022

ACE-I, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors; ARB, angiotensin receptor blockers; CV, cardiovascular; CVD, CV disease; CVRF, CV risk factors; ESC, European Society of Cardiology; HER2, human epidermal receptor 2; HF, heart failure; HFA, Heart Failure Association; ICOS, International Cardio-Oncology Society; MEK, mitogen-activated extracellular signal-regulated kinase; PI, proteasome inhibitors; RAF, rapidly accelerated fibrosarcoma; VEGFi, vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cWithout delaying cancer treatments. dAs per the European Medicine Agency: ≥350 mg/m2 doxorubicin or equivalent; as per the United States Food and Drug Administration: ≥300 mg/m2 doxorubicin or equivalent. eSee Section 5.2.1 for specific liposomal doxorubicin type and malignancies. fCarvedilol (preferred beta-blocker for CV protection if there is no contraindication),186 bisoprolol, controlled/extended-release metoprolol succinate and nebivolol. gVEGFi and bevacizumab, RAF inhibitor, MEK inhibitor, PI, dasatinib, ponatinib, and osimertinib. hAccording to HFA-ICOS risk assessment tools (Section 4.1; Table 4). Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

limit in the meta-analysis of GLS to predict future significant LVEF reduction.93 Using the 15% threshold will maximize specificity and minimize overdiagnosis of CTRCD and guide cardioprotective therapy.1,4,93 In patients with poor TTE image quality or when TTE is not diagnostic, CMR should be considered, including fast strain-encoded CMR when available.105,204–206 MUGA can be considered as a thirdline modality.

Baseline C4 C5 C6 3 M post tx

12 M post tx C1 C2 C3

Anthracycline chemotherapy surveillance protocol

Class 1 Class 1Ia Class 1Ib

ECG

cTnb / NPb

TTEa

ECG

cTnb / NPb

TTEa

ECG

cTn / NP

TTEa High and very high

risk

Moderate

risk

Low risk

Figure 10 Cardiovascular toxicity monitoring in patients receiving anthracycline chemotherapy. cTn, cardiac troponin; C, chemotherapy cycle; ECG, electrocardiogram; M, months; NP, natriuretic peptides; TTE, transthoracic echocardiography; tx, treatment. Biomarker and TTE assessment should ideally be performed before the corresponding anthracycline cycle (C1–C6). aCardiac magnetic resonance should be considered for the assessment of cardiac function when TTE is unavailable or not diagnostic. In moderate-risk patients, TTE should be considered after a cumulative dose of ≥250 mg/m2 of doxorubicin or equivalent. In low-risk patients, TTE may be considered after a cumulative dose of ≥250 mg/m2 of doxorubicin or equivalent. bMeasurement of NP and/or cTn is recommended in all patients with cancer if these biomarkers are going to be used during treatment monitoring. cTn and NP monitoring every two cycles during anthracycline chemotherapy and within 3 months after therapy completion may be considered in low-risk patients (Class IIb, Level C). cTn and NP monitoring every two cycles during anthracycline chemotherapy and within 3 months after therapy completion should be considered in moderate-risk patients and in low-risk patients receiving a cumulative dose of ≥250 mg/m2 of doxorubicin or equivalent (Class IIa, Level C). Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

5.5 Cancer therapy-related

cardiovascular toxicity monitoring protocols 5.5.1. Anthracycline chemotherapy Anthracycline-induced CTRCD is a dose-dependent and cumulative process of variable onset that may present with symptomatic or asymptomatic CTRCD.4 Figure 10 summarizes the recommended monitoring protocol during anthracycline therapy according to baseline CTRCD risk (Table 4). Clinical assessment combined with cardiac biomarkers (cTn and NP) and TTE (including 3D-LVEF and GLS when available) can identify both symptomatic and asymptomatic CTRCD with a reasonably high negative predictive value. This topic has been extensively reviewed in two recent HFA position statements.53,54 Classifying patients based on their risk of anthracycline-induced CV toxicity has allowed the early implementation of personalized preventive strategies (Section 5.2.1).14 Patients with pre-existing CVD should be treated with guidelinebased medical therapy.14,19,207

5.5.2 HER2-targeted therapies

HER2-targeted therapies are a crucial part of the treatment of patients with HER2-positive invasive BC in both early and metastatic settings. In the neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant settings, drugs currently approved are trastuzumab, pertuzumab, trastuzumab emtansine, and neratinib. In the metastatic setting, trastuzumab, pertuzumab, trastuzumab emtansine, tucatinib, and trastuzumab deruxtecan are currently approved.214–216 Trastuzumab can also be used in patients with HER2-overexpressing metastatic gastric adenocarcinomas in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy and either capecitabine or 5-fluorouracil (5-FU). It is recognized that anti-HER2 therapies may lead to LVD in up to 15–20% of patients and to overt HF if surveillance is missed, or in high- and very high-risk patients.217–220 LV function surveillance based on LVEF and GLS is recommended prior to and every 3 months during HER2-targeted therapies treatment surveillance (Figure 11).22 However, this single algorithm has not been tested in low- or high-risk patients and increased frequency of assessment (according to local availability) is recommended in high-risk patients. The use of cardiac serum biomarkers to identify CTRCD is less well-defined during anti-HER2 treatments.217 Measurement of cTn in BC patients after anthracycline-based chemotherapy but prior to trastuzumab should be considered, as an elevated cTn identifies patients at higher risk of trastuzumab-induced CTRCD. Serial NP measurement was more sensitive than cTn at predicting subsequent declines in LVEF during trastuzumab treatment.74

Recommendation Table 7 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during anthracycline chemotherapy and in the first 12 months after therapy

Recommendations Classa Levelb

TTE Baseline echocardiographyc is recommended in all patients with cancer before anthracycline chemotherapy.12,24,208–210 I B In all adults receiving anthracycline chemotherapy, an echocardiogram is recommended within 12 months after completing treatment.208 I B In high- and very high-risk patients, echocardiography is recommended every two cycles and within 3 months after completing treatment.24,208–210 I C In moderate-risk patients, additional echocardiography should be considered after a cumulative dose of ≥250 mg/m2 of doxorubicin or equivalent.7 IIa C In low-risk patients, additional echocardiography may be considered after a cumulative dose of ≥250 mg/m2 of doxorubicin or equivalent.7 IIb C Cardiac serum biomarkers Baseline measurement of NP and cTn is recommended in high- and very high-risk patients prior to anthracycline chemotherapy.55,65,211 I B

Continued Baseline measurement of NP and cTn should be

considered in low- and moderate-risk patients prior to anthracycline chemotherapy.211 IIa C cTn and NP monitoring before every cycle during anthracycline chemotherapy and 3 and 12 months after therapy completion is recommended in highand very high-risk patients.55,175,211 I B cTn and NP monitoring every two cycles during anthracycline chemotherapy and within 3 months after therapy completion should be considered in moderate-risk patients and in low-risk patients receiving a cumulative dose of ≥250 mg/m2 of doxorubicin or equivalent.55,59,212,213 IIa C cTn and NP monitoring every two cycles during anthracycline chemotherapy and within 3 months after therapy completion may be considered in low-risk patients.55,59,212,213 IIb C © ESC 2022

cTn, cardiac troponin; NP, natriuretic peptides; TTE, transthoracic echocardiography. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cIf echocardiography is unavailable or non-diagnostic, follow general cardiac imaging modalities recommendations (see Section 4.5). Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

For patients requiring adjuvant chemotherapy and anti-HER2-targeted therapy, the use of non-anthracycline chemotherapy should be considered by the MDT according to risk of relapse, cardiac risks, and in discussion with the treating oncologist.217 When anthracycline chemotherapy in the (neo)-adjuvant setting is necessary, sequential use (anthracyclines followed by taxanes and anti-HER2 agents) has been shown to significantly decrease the incidence of CTRCD in several adjuvant trials, compared with concomitant use in earlier trials.220–224 Recommendation Table 8 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during human epidermal receptor 2-targeted therapies and in the first 12 months after therapy

Recommendations Classa Levelb

TTE Baseline echocardiographyc is recommended before HER2-targeted therapies in all patients.225 I B

Continued

9 M 12 M 3 M 6 M

HER2-targeted therapy surveillance protocol

High and very high

riskb

Low and moderate

riska Baseline

e

ECG

cTnd / NPd

TTEc

ECG

cTn / NP

TTEc

Class 1 Class 1Ia Class 1Ib

3 M post tx 12 M post tx

Figure 11 Cardiovascular toxicity monitoring in patients receiving human epidermal receptor 2-targeted therapies. cTn, cardiac troponin; CV, cardiovascular; EBC, early breast cancer; ECG, electrocardiogram; HER2, human epidermal receptor 2; M, months; NP, natriuretic peptides; TTE, transthoracic echocardiography; tx, treatment. This protocol refers to CV toxicity monitoring in patients receiving neoadjuvant or adjuvant anti-HER2 targeted therapies for non-metastatic disease or first year in metastatic disease. Biomarker assessment should ideally be performed before the corresponding trastuzumab cycle. TTE should be performed in week 2 or 3 of a 3-weekly trastuzumab cycle. aIn low-risk HER2+ EBC patients who are asymptomatic and with a normal assessment after 3 months, reducing TTE monitoring to every 4 months may be considered (Class IIb, Level C). In low- and moderate-risk metastatic HER2+ disease, TTE surveillance can be reduced to every 6 months after the first year in asymptomatic patients with normal TTE assessment (Class I, Level C). bIn high- and very high-risk metastatic HER2+ disease, TTE monitoring every 2–3 cycles may be considered depending on the absolute risk and local availability. cCardiac magnetic resonance should be considered for the assessment of cardiac function when TTE is unavailable or not diagnostic. dMeasurement of NP and/or cTn is recommended in all patients with cancer if these biomarkers are going to be used during treatment monitoring. eBaseline cTn measurement should be considered in low- and moderate-risk patients after anthracycline chemotherapy but prior to starting anti-HER2 targeted therapies for CV toxicity risk prediction. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

5.5.3 Fluoropyrimidines

Fluoropyrimidines such as 5-FU and its oral prodrug capecitabine are mainly used for gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies and advanced BC. The most common CTR-CVTs are angina pectoris, ischaemia-related ECG abnormalities, hypertension, Takotsubo syndrome (TTS), and MI (even in patients with normal coronary arteries),1,4,10,43,229,230 with rarer CTR-CVT including myocarditis, arrhythmias, and peripheral arterial toxicity (Raynaud’s phenomenon and ischaemic stroke).231 The incidence of myocardial ischaemia varies according to the dose, scheduling, and route of administration and is up to 10%.232 Among the several mechanisms responsible for 5-FU-induced myocardial ischaemia are coronary vasospasm and endothelial injury.233 Chest pain and ischaemic ECG changes usually occur at rest (less typically during exercise) within days of drug administration and sometimes persist even after treatment cessation. CTR-CVT risk markedly increases in patients with cancer with preexisting CAD. Aggressive control of modifiable CVRFs, according to the 2021 ESC Guidelines on CVD prevention in clinical practice,19 is recommended during and after treatment. A baseline TTE is recommended in patients with a history of symptomatic CV to confirm the presence of pre-existing regional wall motion abnormalities or LVD. Screening for CAD may be considered in selected high- and very high-risk patients before the administration of these drugs and according to local protocols and current recommendations.12,234,235

5.5.4 Vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors

Aberrant activation of kinases plays a critical role in both the development of numerous cancer types and in CV and metabolic homeostasis. Inhibition of the VEGF signalling pathway is achieved with either monoclonal antibodies (administered i.v.) against circulating VEGF or with small-molecule TKI (taken orally) targeting VEGF receptors.236 VEGFi are used for the treatment of numerous cancer types, including renal, thyroid, and hepatocellular carcinomas. However, their use is associated with a wide array of CV complications including hypertension, HF, QTc prolongation, and acute vascular events (Figure 12).131,237–240 It can be challenging to assess the prognosis of patients experiencing severe CV side effects because

In patients receiving neoadjuvant or adjuvant HER2-targeted therapies, echocardiography is recommended every 3 months and within 12 months after completing treatment.225,226 I B In low-risk HER2+ EBC patientsd who are asymptomatic and with a normal assessment after 3 months, reducing monitoring to every 4 months may be considered. IIb C In high- and very high-risk HER2+ EBC patients,d more frequent echocardiography monitoringe should be considered during treatment. IIa C In metastatic HER2+ disease, echocardiography is recommended every 3 months during the first year; if the patient remains asymptomatic without CV toxicity, then surveillance can be reduced to every 6 months during future treatment.f I C In metastatic HER2+ disease patients at high- and very high-risk, more frequent echocardiography monitoringe may be considered. IIb C Cardiac biomarkers Baseline NP and cTn measurement are recommended in high- and very high-risk patients prior to anti-HER2-targeted therapies.227,228 I C NP and cTn monitoring every 2–3 cycles during therapy and 3 and 12 months after the end of therapy should be considered in high- and very high-risk HER2+ EBC patients.d,55 IIa C Baseline cTn measurement should be considered in low- and moderate-risk patients post-anthracycline chemotherapy but prior to starting anti-HER2-targeted therapies.55,62 IIa A NP and cTn monitoring at baseline, every 3 months, and 12 months after therapy may be considered in low- and moderate-risk HER2+ EBC patients.d,55 IIb C © ESC 2022

BC, breast cancer; cTn, cardiac troponin; CV, cardiovascular; EBC, early breast cancer; HER2, human epidermal receptor 2; NP, natriuretic peptides; TTE, transthoracic echocardiography. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cIf echocardiography is unavailable or non-diagnostic, follow general cardiac imaging modalities recommendations (see Section 4.5). dThese recommendations are also applicable for HER2+ non-BC patients. eEvery 2–3 cycles depending on the absolute risk and local availability. fPatients at low and moderate risk. Recommendation Table 9 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during fluoropyrimidine therapy

Recommendations Classa Levelb

Baseline CV risk assessment and evaluation including BP measurement, ECG, lipid profile, HbA1c measurement, and SCORE2/ SCORE2-OPc or equivalent is recommended19 before starting fluoropyrimidines. I C A baseline echocardiogram is recommended in patients with a history of symptomatic CVD before starting fluoropyrimidines. I C Screening for CADd may be considered in patients at high and very high risk of CADc before fluoropyrimidines. IIb C © ESC 2022

BP, blood pressure; CAD, coronary artery disease; CV, cardiovascular; CVD, cardiovascular disease; ECG, electrocardiogram; HbA1c, glycated haemoglobin; SCORE2, Systematic Coronary Risk Estimation 2; SCORE2-OP, Systematic Coronary Risk Estimation 2—Older Persons. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cSCORE2 (,70 years) or SCORE2-OP (≥70 years) CV risk stratification: ,50 years: low risk ,2.5%, moderate risk 2.5% to ,7.5%, high risk ≥7.5%; 50–69 years: low risk ,5%; moderate risk 5% to ,10%; high risk ≥10%; ≥70 years: low risk ,7.5%, moderate risk 7.5% to ,15%, high risk ≥15%. dAccording to pre-existing CVD and local protocols.234 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

these drugs are often used in patients with advanced cancer. The goal must be to continue VEGFi treatment for as long as possible with initiation or optimization of CV treatment if indicated. Hypertension is a class effect and is the most reported adverse event under VEGFi treatment. It occurs within hours or days, is dosedependent, and is usually reversed by VEGFi discontinuation.131,239,241–243 The risk is higher in patients with pre-existing hypertension or CVD, previous anthracycline treatment, advanced age, history of smoking, hyperlipidaemia, and/or obesity (Table 4).4,244 LVD and HF occur in a minority of patients in RCTs,245 but are reported more frequently in routine practice246 and are often reversible.247 Acute arterial events (aortic dissection, stroke, arterial thrombosis, acute coronary events, vasospasm) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) can also complicate treatment with VEGFi.248 QTc prolongation has been described with sunitinib, sorafenib, and vandetanib,249 but it is rarely related to severe arrhythmic events, except with vandetanib.250 Some small-molecule TKI (e.g. sorafenib and sunitinib) can cause AF251 and HF.43,129,247

Aflibercept

Monoclonal antibodies

VEGF TKI

Bevacizumaba

Ramucirumaba

Axitinib

Cabozantinib

Lenvatinib

Pazopanib

Regorafenib

Sorafenib

Sunitinib

Vandetanib HTN HF VTE ATE MI

VEGFi-related cardiovascular toxicities

Very common: ≥10% incidence

Common: 1% to <10% incidence Uncommon: 0.1% to < 1% incidence

Rare: <0.1% incidence

QTc

Figure 12 Vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors-related cardiovascular toxicities. ATE, arterial thromboembolism; EMA, European Medicines Agency; FDA, Food and Drug Administration; HF, heart failure; HTN, hypertension; MedDRA, medical dictionary for regulatory activities; MI, myocardial infarction; ↑QTc, corrected QT interval prolongation; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitors; VEGF, vascular endothelial growth factor; VEGFi, vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors; VTE, venous thromboembolism. Adverse reactions reported in multiple clinical trials or during post-marketing use are listed by system organ class (in MedDRA) and frequency. If the frequency is unknown or cannot be estimated from the available data, a blank space has been left. aBevacizumab: hypertension frequency 5–42% (EMA); 60–77% of the patients who received bevacizumab in combination with erlotinib. Pre-existing hypertension should be adequately controlled before starting treatment. Ramucirumab: hypertension frequency 16–26% (EMA/FDA); in combination with erlotinib, the incidence of hypertension was 24–45%. Patients with uncontrolled hypertension were excluded from the trials. Figure developed from EMA prescribing information,252 FDA prescribing information.253 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

A baseline CV risk assessment includes clinical examination, BP measurement, and an ECG with baseline QTcF measurement (see Section 4).20 Especially in patients with known hypertension, BP should be controlled before VEGFi therapy. A baseline TTE is recommended for high- and very high-risk patients.14 Patients with impaired LV function and/or patients at high or very high risk of developing HF should be referred to the cardiologist before starting VEGFi therapy.14

ECGa

ECGa

TTEb 6 M 8 M 9 M 12 M Every 6–12 M 3 M 4 M

NPc,d

ECGa

NPc

TTEb VEGFi surveillance protocol

High and very high

risk

Moderate

risk

Low risk

TTEb,d Baseline

Class 1 Class 1Ia Class 1Ib

Figure 13 Cardiovascular toxicity monitoring in patients receiving vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors. ECG, electrocardiogram; M, months; NP, natriuretic peptides; QTc, corrected QT interval; TTE, transthoracic echocardiography; VEGFi, vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors. aIn patients treated with VEGFi at moderate or high risk of QTc prolongation, ECG is recommended (Class I, Level C) monthly during the first 3 months and every 3–6 months thereafter (Section 6.4). Consider an ECG 2 weeks after starting treatment in high-risk patients and new monitoring in the case of any dose increase (see Section 6.4.2). bCardiac magnetic resonance should be considered for the assessment of cardiac function when TTE is unavailable or not diagnostic. cMeasurement of NP is recommended in all patients with cancer if these biomarkers are going to be used during treatment monitoring. dTTE and NP should be considered at 4 weeks after starting treatment in very high-risk patients. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

Monitoring during and after treatment is indicated for all patients treated with a VEGFi and is based on close clinical follow-up using serial ECGs, biomarkers, and echocardiography. Early recognition and treatment of hypertension are essential to prevent other CV complications, especially HF. Home BP monitoring is recommended daily during the first cycle, after each increase of anticancer therapy dose, and every 2–3 weeks thereafter.138,254,255 When treatment with a VEGFi is stopped, a drop in BP must be anticipated and BP-lowering therapy must be reduced and/or interrupted accordingly (Section 6). In patients at risk of QTc prolongation, regular monitoring of the QTc interval is recommended after a dose increase, whenever other QT-prolonging agents are added, or if electrolyte imbalances occur (Section 6). Patients treated with a VEGFi must also be screened regularly for symptoms and clinical signs of HF. Regular NP measurement and echocardiography can be useful for the detection of CTRCD, although evidence is weak (Figure 13).138,254,255

5.5.5 Multitargeted kinase inhibitors targeting

BCR-ABL Chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML) results from aberrant activation of ABL1 kinase due to a chromosomal translocation. Small-molecule TKIs targeting BCR-ABL—including imatinib, bosutinib, dasatinib, nilotinib, and ponatinib—have proven effective in the treatment of CML. The toxicities associated with these TKIs are unique and due to ‘off-target’ effects of each drug. Dasatinib is associated with group 1 pulmonary hypertension (PH), HF, and pleural and pericardial effusion, whereas nilotinib and ponatinib are generally associated with vascular events (Figure 14).131,256–259 Secondgeneration BCR-ABL TKI may induce a QTc prolongation (see Section 6.4.2). CV toxicity risk is higher in patients aged .65 years (relative risk 1.8) and in those with underlying DM (relative risk 2.5), hypertension (relative risk 3.2) or pre-existing CAD (relative risk 2.6).256–258,260 Before BCR-ABL TKI therapy, it is critical to define baseline CV toxicity risk with special attention to BP, glucose, and lipids.

Recommendation Table 10 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors

Recommendations Classa Levelb

BP monitoring BP measurement is recommended for patients treated with VEGFi, bevacizumab, or ramucirumab at every clinical visit. I C Daily home monitoring of BP for patients treated with VEGFi during the first cycle, after each increase of VEGFi dose, and every 2–3 weeks thereafter is recommended. I C ECG monitoring In patients treated with VEGFi at moderate or high risk of QTc prolongation, QTcc monitoring is recommended monthly during the first 3 months and every 3–6 months thereafter.d I C Echocardiography Baseline echocardiography is recommended in high- and very high-risk patients treated with VEGFi or bevacizumab. I C Baseline echocardiography should be considered in low- and moderate-risk patients treated with a VEGFi or bevacizumab. IIa C

Continued Echocardiography may be considered every 4 months during the first year in moderate-risk patients receiving VEGFi or bevacizumab. IIb C

Echocardiography should be considered every 3 months during the first year in high- and very high-risk patients receiving a VEGFi or bevacizumab.e IIa C Echocardiography every 6–12 months should be considered in moderate- and high-risk patients with cancer who require long-term treatment with a VEGFi. IIa C Cardiac biomarker NP may be considered at baseline and then every 4 months during the first year in moderate-risk patients receiving a VEGFi. IIb C NP should be considered at baseline, 4 weeks after starting treatment, and them every 3 months during the first year in high- and very high-risk patients receiving a VEGFi. IIa C © ESC 2022

BP, blood pressure; ECG, electrocardiogram; NP, natriuretic peptides; QTc, corrected QT interval; QTcF, corrected QT interval using Fridericia correction; VEGFi, vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cQTc interval using Fridericia correction (QTcF = QT/3√RR) is the preferred method. dConsider an ECG 2 weeks after starting treatment in high-risk patients and new monitoring in the case of any dose increase (see Section 6.4.2). eAn additional echocardiography 4 weeks after starting treatment should be considered in selected high- and very high-risk patients according to local availability, especially if cardiac biomarker surveillance is not available. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

Imatinib

1st generation BCR-ABL TKI

2nd generation BCR-ABL TKI

3rd generation BCR-ABL TKI

Nilotinib

Dasatinib

Bosutinib

Ponatinib HTN HF HG AF DL Peric-E Pleu-E PH VascTox

BCR-ABL TKI-related cardiovascular toxicities

Very common: ≥10% incidence

Common: 1% to <10% incidence Uncommon: 0.1% to < 1% incidence

Rare: <0.1% incidence

QTc

Figure 14 Breakpoint cluster region–Abelson oncogene locus tyrosine kinase inhibitor-related cardiovascular toxicities. AF, atrial fibrillation; BCR-ABL, breakpoint cluster region–Abelson oncogene locus; DL, dyslipidaemia; EMA, European Medicines Agency; FDA, Food and Drug Administration; HF, heart failure; HG, hyperglycaemia; HTN, hypertension; MedDRA, medical dictionary for regulatory activities; MI, myocardial infarction; PAD, peripheral artery disease; Peric-E, pericardial effusion; PH, pulmonary hypertension; Pleu-E, pleural effusion; ↑QTc, corrected QT interval prolongation; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitors; VascTox, vascular toxicity (stroke, MI, PAD). Adverse reactions reported in multiple clinical trials or during post-marketing use are listed by system organ class (in MedDRA) and frequency. If the frequency is unknown or cannot be estimated from the available data, a blank space has been left.261 Figure developed from EMA prescribing information,252 FDA prescribing information.253 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

Baseline 3 M 6 M 9 M 12 M Every 6–12 M

BP

HbA1c

ECG

ABI

TTE

Physical examinationa

Bosutinib Dasatinib

Nilotinib Ponatinib

Nilotinib Ponatinib Nilotinib Ponatinib

Dasatinib Nilotinib Ponatinib

High and very high risk patients treated with dasatinib or ponatinib

Second and third generationBCR-ABL TKI surveillance protocol

Class 1 Class 1Ia Class 1Ib

Bosutinib Dasatinib

Nilotinib Ponatinib

Nilotinib Ponatinib

Dasatinib Ponatinib Bosutinib

Nilotinib Ponatinib

Lipid profile/

Figure 15 Second- and third-generation breakpoint cluster region–Abelson oncogene locus tyrosine kinase inhibitors surveillance protocol. ABI, ankle– brachial index; BCR-ABL, breakpoint cluster region-Abelson oncogene locus; BP, blood pressure; CV, cardiovascular; ECG, electrocardiogram; HbA1c, glycated haemoglobin; M, months; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitors; TTE, transthoracic echocardiography. aCoronary artery calcium scoring can reclassify CV risk upwards and downwards in addition to conventional risk factors, and may be considered in men and women with calculated CV risk around decision thresholds.19 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

Baseline ECG is recommended in all patients and QTc monitoring in patients treated with second-generation BCR-ABL TKI. Depending on the type of therapy used, specific CV assessments should be performed after drug initiation (Figure 15).256

5.5.6 Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors

Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitors are increasingly used to treat lymphoid malignancies. Ibrutinib, a first-in-class irreversible oral inhibitor of BTK, has proven highly effective in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia and related B-cell malignancies including mantle cell lymphoma, Waldenström macroglobulinemia, and marginal zone lymphomas.262 These disorders are usually diagnosed in elderly patients in whom frequent comorbidities coexist at diagnosis that increase the risk of CTR-CVT.263,264 Ibrutinib has been associated with bleeding diathesis, infections, and an increased risk of hypertension, AF, and HF.265–267 Ibrutinib may also cause ventricular arrhythmias without prolonging QT.267,268 Acalabrutinib is a secondgeneration BTK inhibitor with greater BTK selectivity. In a recent phase III, randomized, multicentre, open-label, non-inferiority study, acalabrutinib demonstrated a non-inferior progression-free survival compared to ibrutinib in patients with previously treated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia with a lower incidence of symptomatic CV events.269 However, grade ≥3 AF (symptomatic AF where urgent intervention is indicated)270 and AF in patients ≥75 years old or with previous AF history were comparable between groups, as was the risk of CV events in patients with pre-existing CVRFs or CVD.271

Therefore, we currently do not have enough data to establish different monitoring strategies in patients treated with these drugs. Due to the lack of evidence-based recommendations, the management of these CV events is challenging.264 Antihypertensive initiation has been associated with a lower risk of a major adverse CV events (MACE).264 Opportunistic screening for AF by pulse-taking or ECG rhythm strip is recommended at every clinical visit during BTK inhibitor therapy.272 Due to a higher bleeding risk, ibrutinib should be temporarily interrupted in patients requiring dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) and 3–7 days before invasive procedures. In case of emergency interventions, platelet transfusion should be considered to minimize bleeding risks.262

Recommendation Table 11 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during second- and third-generation breakpoint cluster region–Abelson oncogene locus tyrosine kinase inhibitors

Recommendations Classa Levelb Baseline CV risk assessmentc is recommended in patients who require second- or third-generation BCR-ABL TKI.256,261 I C In patients treated with nilotinib or ponatinib, CV risk assessmentc is recommended every 3 months during the first year and every 6–12 months thereafter.256,261 I C QTcd measurement should be considered at baseline, at 2 and 4 weeks after starting nilotinib, and 2 weeks after any dose increase.259 IIa C Baseline echocardiography should be considered in all patients before starting second- and third-generation BCR-ABL TKI. IIa C Baseline echocardiography is recommended in patients scheduled to receive dasatinib. I C Echocardiography should be considered every 3 months during the first year in high- and very high-risk patients receiving dasatinib or ponatinib. IIa C Echocardiography may be considered every 6–12 months in patients who require long-term (.12 months) ponatinib or dasatinib. IIb C Serial assessment of ankle brachial index may be considered to detect subclinical peripheral vascular disease. IIb C © ESC 2022

BCR-ABL, breakpoint cluster region–Abelson oncogene locus; BP, blood pressure; CV, cardiovascular; ECG, electrocardiogram; HbA1c, glycated haemoglobin; HFA, Heart Failure Association; ICOS, International Cardio-Oncology Society; QTc, corrected QT interval; QTcF, corrected QT interval using Fridericia correction; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitors. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cPhysical examination, BP measurement, ECG, lipid profile, and HbA1c measurement. Coronary artery calcium scoring can reclassify CV disease risk upwards and downwards in addition to conventional risk factors, and may be considered at baseline in low- and moderate-risk patients as per HFA-ICOS risk assessment tools.19 dQTc interval using Fridericia correction (QTcF = QT/3√RR) is the preferred method. Recommendation Table 12 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy

Recommendations Classa Levelb

BP monitoring and management BP measurement is recommended for patients treated with BTK inhibitors at every clinical visit.264 I B Weekly home monitoring of BP during the first 3 months and every month thereafter should be considered for patients treated with BTK inhibitors. IIa C Echocardiography Baseline echocardiography is recommended in high-risk patientsc scheduled to receive BTK inhibitors.267,268 I C TTE is recommended in all patients who develop AF during BTK inhibitor therapy. I C

Continued Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

5.5.7 Multiple myeloma therapies

There are many classes of pharmacotherapy that are approved for the treatment of MM using a range of combinations. These include immunomodulatory drugs (IMiD), dexamethasone, PI, and monoclonal antibodies (e.g. daratumumab). PI—including bortezomib, carfilzomib, and ixazomib—have become a mainstay of therapy for newly diagnosed MM as well as relapsed disease.276,277 Several large studies using combination therapy for MM have demonstrated an increased risk of serious CV adverse events.278–281 MM patients being treated with PI have a high incidence of coexistent CV comorbidities

AF Opportunistic screening for AF by pulse-taking or ECG rhythm strip is recommended at every clinical visit during BTK inhibitor therapy.273 I C © ESC 2022

AF, atrial fibrillation; BP, blood pressure; BTK, Bruton tyrosine kinase; DM, diabetes mellitus; ECG, electrocardiogram; HF, heart failure; QTc, corrected QT interval; TTE, transthoracic echocardiography; VHD, valvular heart disease. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cMale, age ≥65 years, previous history of hypertension, DM, QTc ≥480 ms, AF, HF, cardiomyopathy, or severe VHD.263,274,275

Cyclophosphamide

Melphalan

Lenalidomide

Pomalidomide

Alkylating agents

Bortezomib

Carfilzomib

Proteasome inhibitorsa

Immunomodulatory drugs

Thalidomide

Daratumumab

Elotuzumab

Monoclonal antibodies

Isatuximab HTN HF AF HG/DM MI VTE PH ATE

Multiple myeloma drugs-related cardiovascular toxicities

Very common: ≥10% incidence

Common: 1% to <10% incidence Uncommon: 0.1% to < 1% incidence

Rare: <0.1% incidence

Figure 16 Multiple myeloma drug-related cardiovascular toxicities. AF, atrial fibrillation; ATE, arterial thromboembolism; DM, diabetes mellitus; EMA, European Medicines Agency; FDA, Food and Drug Administration; HF, heart failure; HG, hyperglycaemia; HTN, hypertension; MedDRA, medical dictionary for regulatory activities; MI, myocardial infarction; PH, pulmonary hypertension; VTE, venous thromboembolism. Adverse reactions reported in multiple clinical trials or during post-marketing use are listed by system organ class (in MedDRA) and frequency. If the frequency is unknown or cannot be estimated from the available data, a blank space has been left. aIxazomib produces peripheral oedema in up to 18% of patients and hyperglycaemia in combination with lenalidomide or pomalidomide and dexamethasone. Figure developed from EMA prescribing information,252 FDA prescribing information.253 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

and increased baseline CV risk.282,283 PI have been associated with a variety of CV toxicities including hypertension, HF,284 acute coronary syndromes (ACS),66 arrhythmias,285 PH,286 and VTE (Figure 16).287,288 During therapy, cardiac biomarkers and TTE are important diagnostic and prognostic tools that can inform clinical decision-making (Figure 17).66 HF—especially HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF)—is a frequent manifestation of cardiac amyloidosis, but it is also an important adverse effect of PI therapy, especially under carfilzomib. In a safety analysis of patients with MM being treated with carfilzomib, 7.2% of patients were found to have new HF.284 In another study, 23% of patients with MM treated with carfilzomib developed clinical HF and/or LVD.289 The mechanism is not well understood but is possibly related to PI-induced oxidative stress within myocytes, inhibition of the proteasome, or transient endothelial dysfunction.281,283 Although no studies have yet addressed the optimal follow-up scheme in patients with MM treated with PI, a common scheme consists of 3–6-monthly visits with ECG, complete blood

Clinical assessment Clinical assessment

BP and ECG

TTE TTE every 3 cycles under carfilzomib

Baseline During therapy

NP

Proteasome inhibitors surveillance protocol

Lowmoderate

risk

High and very high

risk

Cardiac amyloidosis Clinical assessment

BP and ECG

TTE TTE every 3 cycles under carfilzomib

NP NP every cycle during the first 6 cycles under carfilzomib or bortezomiba

Clinical assessment

BP and ECG

TTE and CMR TTE every 3 cycles

NP and cTn NP and cTn every 3-6 months

BP at every clinical visit BP home monitoring

Class 1 Class 1Ia Class 1Ib

BP at every clinical visit BP home monitoring

Clinical assessment

BP at every clinical visit BP home monitoring

Clinical assessment

NP every cycle during the first 6 cycles under carfilzomib or bortezomiba

Figure 17 Cardiovascular monitoring in patients with multiple myeloma receiving proteasome inhibitors. BP, blood pressure; CMR, cardiac magnetic resonance; cTn, cardiac troponin; ECG, electrocardiogram; NP, natriuretic peptides; TTE, transthoracic echocardiography. aEvery 2 months for patients treated with ixazomib. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

tests (including NP and cTn) and echocardiography surveillance during PI therapy.290 A recent prospective study of patients with relapsed MM confirmed the utility of NP to assist in risk stratification as well as management of CV morbidity during treatment.66 Hypertension, another adverse effect of PI, may also contribute to the development of HFpEF. Patients with MM are at elevated risk of thrombosis due to both patient- and myeloma-related factors, particularly the combination of PI and IMiD (Figure 18).279,287,291–297 In the ASPIRE (Carfilzomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone vs. Lenalidomide and Dexamethasone for the Treatment of Patients with Relapsed Multiple Myeloma) study, patients treated with a combination of carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone had higher rates of VTE compared with those treated with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (6.6% vs. 3.9%).279

Oncological guidelines recommend the use of aspirin or prophylactic doses of low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWH) in lowrisk patients receiving thalidomide- or lenalidomide-based regimens.298 In patients at high risk of VTE, therapeutic doses of LMWH are recommended.299 The role of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOAC) in MM patients needs further validation in larger trials, but recent small studies have confirmed the efficacy and safety of low doses of apixaban and rivaroxaban for VTE prevention.300–302

Risk factors for venous thromboembolic events in patients with multiple myeloma

Patient-related risk factors

Previous VTE Acute infections Autoimmune disease Central venous catheter Chronic renal disease Cigarette smoking CVD DM General surgery History of inherited thrombophilia Immobilization, surgery, trauma Obesity (BMI >30 kg/m2)

Myeloma-related risk factors

Advanced disease status Erythropoietin-stimulating agents High dexamethasone doses Hyper-viscosity state Thalidomide/lenalidomide/ponalidomide

Figure 18 Risk factors for venous thromboembolic events in patients with multiple myeloma. BMI, body mass index; CVD, cardiovascular disease; DM, diabetes mellitus; VTE, venous thromboembolism. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

5.5.8 Rapidly accelerated fibrosarcoma and

mitogen-activated extracellular signal-regulated kinase inhibitor treatment The rapidly accelerated fibrosarcoma (RAF) inhibitors—vemurafenib, dabrafenib, and encorafenib—are approved for the treatment of metastatic melanoma with a BRAF V600 mutation. The mitogenactivated extracellular signal-regulated kinase (MEK) inhibitors— trametinib, cobimetinib, binimetinib, and selumetinib—have also shown significant clinical activity in melanoma patients whose tumour contains a BRAF V600 mutation, and are now largely used in combination with RAF inhibitors. The main CV effects to be considered are hypertension, PE, and CTRCD, which are associated with all combinations of RAF and MEK inhibitors, and QTc prolongation, associated solely with the coadministration of cobimetinib and vemurafenib (Figure 19).12,308,309 RAF inhibitor treatment alone or in combination with a MEK inhibitor is associated with an increased risk of MI and AF.308 Patients with cancer with pre-existing CVD have an increased frequency of CV adverse events during treatment with MEK and RAF inhibitors, and therefore baseline risk stratification is recommended.12 Most cardiac complications induced by administration of MEK and RAF inhibitors seem to be attributable to the MEK inhibitor, with the RAF inhibitor enhancing the toxic effects of the MEK inhibitor.310–313 Hypertension and LVD were twice as frequent when MEK and RAF inhibitors were coadministered compared with single therapy with RAF inhibitor alone.314 CTRCD can manifest any time from the first month of therapy to 2 years after the end of the oncological treatment.315 Baseline TTE is recommended in patients at moderate to high risk of CTR-CVT. During treatment, it is necessary to monitor BP at each visit and promote weekly outpatient monitoring during the first 3 months and monthly thereafter. In patients treated with cobimetinib/vemurafenib, an ECG is recommended at 2 and 4 weeks after initiation of treatment and every 3 months thereafter. In high-risk patients, periodic monitoring of ventricular function with echocardiography should be considered every 6–12 months. CV protective medications (such as angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors [ACE-I], angiotensin receptor blockers [ARB],

Recommendation Table 13 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during multiple myeloma therapies

Recommendations Classa Levelb

BP monitoring BP measurement is recommended for patients treated with PI at every clinical visit. I C Home monitoring of BP weekly during the first 3 months and monthly thereafter should be considered for patients treated with PI. IIa C Cardiac serum biomarkers Measurement of NP is recommended prior to PI in high- and very high-risk patients.66,303 I C Measurement of NP should be considered prior to PI in low- and moderate-risk patients.66 IIa C In patients receiving carfilzomib or bortezomib, measurement of NP should be considered at baseline and every cycle during the first 6 cycles.c,66 IIa B NP and cTn measurements are recommended at baseline and every 3–6 months in patients with AL-CA.d,290 I B TTE Baseline echocardiography, including assessment for AL-CA, is recommended in all patients with MM scheduled to receive PI. I C Echocardiography surveillance every 3 cycles should be considered in high- and very high-risk patients receiving carfilzomib.280 IIa B Echocardiography surveillance every 3 cycles may be considered in low- and moderate-risk patients receiving carfilzomib. IIb C Echocardiography surveillance should be considered every 3–6 months in patients with AL-CA treated with PI.d,290 IIa C VTE prophylaxis Therapeutic doses of LMWH are recommended in patients with MM with previous VTE.296,298,302,304,305 I B Prophylactic doses of LMWH are recommended in patients with MM with VTE-related risk factorse (excluding previous VTE) at least during the first 6 months of therapy.296,304,305 I A Aspirin should be considered as an alternative to LMWH in patients with MM with no risk factors or one VTE-related risk factore (excluding previous VTE) at least during the first 6 months of therapy.296,304–307 IIa B

Continued Low doses of apixaban or rivaroxabanf may be

considered as an alternative to LMWH or aspirin in patients with MM with VTE-related risk factorse (excluding previous VTE) at least during the first 6 months of therapy.300–302 IIb C © ESC 2022

AL-CA, amyloid light-chain cardiac amyloidosis; BP, blood pressure; cTn, cardiac troponin; HF, heart failure; LMWH, low-molecular-weight heparins; MM, multiple myeloma; NP, natriuretic peptides; PI, proteasome inhibitors; TTE, transthoracic echocardiography; VTE, venous thromboembolism. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cEvery 2 months for patients treated with oral ixazomib. dDepending on HF severity and treatment. eSee Figure 18.295,296,299 fLow doses of apixaban (2.5 mg twice a day) or rivaroxaban (10 mg once a day). Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

and beta-blockers) have not been evaluated in patients treated with MEK and RAF inhibitors but, from a mechanistic perspective, beta-blockers might prevent CTRCD induced by MEK inhibitors. The MEK/ERK pathway has a cardiac protective effect, regulated by beta-adrenergic signalling, which also controls the p38 mitogen-activated protein kinases pathway, associated with cardiotoxic effects. Beta-blockers might exert their cardioprotective effects by reducing p38 signalling.315

Dabrafenib

Encorafenib

RAF inhibitors

Vemurafenibb

Binimetinib

Cobimetinib

MEK inhibitors

Trametinibb HTN SVT/SBra HG/DM HF BLEED VTE/PE

RAF inhibitor- and MEK inhibitor-related cardiovascular toxicities

Very common: ≥10% incidence

Common: 1% to <10% incidence Uncommon: 0.1% to < 1% incidence

Rare: <0.1% incidence QTc

Figure 19 Rapidly accelerated fibrosarcoma and mitogen-activated extracellular signal-regulated kinase inhibitor-related cardiovascular toxicities. AF, atrial fibrillation; BLEED, increased bleeding risk; DM, diabetes mellitus; EMA, European Medicines Agency; FDA, Food and Drug Administration; HF, heart failure; HG, hyperglycaemia; HTN, hypertension; MedDRA, medical dictionary for regulatory activities; MEK, mitogen-activated extracellular signal-regulated kinase; PE, pulmonary embolism; ↑QTc, corrected QT interval prolongation; RAF, rapidly accelerated fibrosarcoma; SBr, sinus bradycardia; SVT, supraventricular tachycardia; VTE, venous thromboembolism. Adverse reactions reported in multiple clinical trials or during post-marketing use are listed by system organ class (in MedDRA) and frequency. If the frequency is unknown or cannot be estimated from the available data, a blank space has been left. aDabrafenib is related with SBr. Encorafenib is related with SVT. Vemurafenib rarely causes AF. Trametinib is related with bradycardia in some post-marketing reports. bPeripheral oedema is very common. Figure developed from EMA prescribing information,252 FDA prescribing information.253

Recommendation Table 14 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during combined rapidly accelerated fibrosarcoma and mitogen-activated extracellular signal-regulated kinase inhibitor therapy

Recommendations Classa Levelb

BP monitoring at each clinical visit and weekly outpatient monitoring during the first 3 months of treatment and monthly thereafter is recommended. I C In patients treated with cobimetinib/vemurafenib, an ECG is recommended at 2 and 4 weeks after initiation of treatment and every 3 months thereafter.c I C Baseline echocardiography is recommended in all high- and very high-risk patients scheduled to receive combined RAF and MEK inhibitors. I C Baseline echocardiography may be considered in low- and moderate-risk patients scheduled to receive combined RAF and MEK inhibitors. IIb C Echocardiography should be considered every 4 months during the first year in high- and very high-risk patients receiving combined RAF and MEK inhibitors. IIa C © ESC 2022

BP, blood pressure; ECG, electrocardiogram; MEK, mitogen-activated extracellular signal-regulated kinase; RAF, rapidly accelerated fibrosarcoma. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cConsider an ECG and new monitoring in the case of any dose increase (see Section 6.4.2). Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

5.5.9 Immune checkpoint inhibitors

Immunotherapies, which harness the immune system to destroy cancer cells, come in different forms but the most widely used are ICI.316 The immune checkpoints are proteins expressed in the T cells that inhibit their activation when they contact a body cell. ICI include monoclonal antibodies that block the immune brakes or regulators, cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 (CTLA-4) (ipilimumab, tremelimumab), programmed death-1 (PD-1) (nivolumab, cemiplimab, pembrolizumab), and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) (atezolizumab, avelumab, durvalumab) expressed in the cancer cells, with the consequent cytotoxic immune response. By blocking these checkpoints from binding with their partner proteins, ICI inhibit the ‘off’ signal, activating T cells and promoting killing of cancer cells. Although their pathophysiology is not clearly defined, ICI may also trigger an

Low risk

cTn

Class 1 Class 1Ia Class 1Ib

ECG

TTE

CV assessmenta

NP

cTn

ECG

TTE

CV assessmenta

NP

High riskb C4 Every

3Cc Every

6 M– 12 Md

C2

C3 Baseline

Immune checkpoint inhibitors surveillance protocol

Figure 20 Cardiovascular surveillance in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. BNP, B-type natriuretic peptide; BP, blood pressure; C, chemotherapy cycle; cTn, cardiac troponin; CV, cardiovascular; CVD, cardiovascular disease; CTRCD, cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction; ECG, electrocardiogram; HbA1c, glycated haemoglobin; ICI, immune checkpoint inhibitors; M, months; NP, natriuretic peptides (including BNP and NT-proBNP); NT-proBNP, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide; TTE, transthoracic echocardiography. aIncluding physical examination, BP, lipid profile, and HbA1c. bDual ICI, combination ICI-cardiotoxic therapy, ICI-related non-CV events, prior CTRCD or CVD. cEvery three cycles until completion of therapy to detect subclinical ICI-related CV toxicity. dIn patients who require long-term (.12 months) ICI treatment. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

overactivation of T cells against non-cancerous tissues, leading to immune-related adverse events.317 Immune-related CV side effects may lead to life-threatening CV complications such as fulminant myocarditis, myopericarditis, cardiac dysfunction, arrhythmias, or MI, which often results in the discontinuation of ICI.318,319 The largest case series of 122 patients with ICI-associated myocarditis had early onset of symptoms (median of 30 days after initial exposure to ICI), and up to 50% died.320 Late CV events (.90 days) are less well characterized but generally exhibit a higher risk of non-inflammatory HF, progressive atherosclerosis, hypertension, and mortality rates.321 Other CV toxicities described during ICI therapy are MI, AV block, supraventricular and ventricular arrhythmias, sudden death, Takotsubo-like syndrome, non-inflammatory HF, hypercholesterolaemia, pericarditis, pericardial effusion, ischaemic stroke, and VTE.322 A meta-analysis including 32 518 patients receiving ICI treatment reported an increased risk of myocarditis, pericardial diseases, HF, dyslipidaemia, MI, and cerebral arterial ischaemia.323 Conditions related with high baseline ICI-related CV toxicity risk include dual ICI therapy (e.g. ipilimumab and nivolumab), combination ICI therapy with other cardiotoxic therapies, and patients with ICI-related non-CV events or prior CTRCD or CVD (Figure 20).324,325 All patients on ICI treatment should have an ECG and troponin assay at baseline (Figure 20).326–329 High-risk patients should additionally have a TTE evaluation at baseline. Due to the lack of evidence-based recommendations, the monitoring of ICI therapy is challenging. Once started on therapy, ECG, cTn, and NP should be checked.330–332 In the JAVELIN trial, which assessed avelumab plus axitinib vs. sunitinib, no clinical value was observed for ontreatment routine TTE monitoring in asymptomatic patients.333 However, in high-risk patients, and in those with high baseline cTn levels, TTE monitoring may be considered. In patients who develop ECG abnormalities, new biomarker changes, or new cardiac symptoms at any time, prompt cardio-oncology evaluation is strongly recommended, including TTE for the evaluation of LVEF and GLS, and CMR when myocarditis is suspected (Table 3).334 5.5.10 Androgen deprivation therapies for

prostate cancer Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is prescribed in 40% of men with prostate cancer as neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant therapy to RT or for biochemical relapse following prostate cancer surgery. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists are the most frequently prescribed ADT. However, GnRH agonists are associated with an increased CV risk and mortality, particularly in patients with prostate cancer aged .60 years.337,338 Baseline risk stratification in patients requiring GnRH agonists depends on vascular disease risk (Figure 21).339,340 No dedicated CV toxicity risk calculators have been developed for patients receiving ADT. It was the consensus of the authors to recommend SCORE2 or SCORE2-OP to stratify CV risk in patients receiving ADT without previous CVD.19 The use of GnRH antagonists represents an alternative in the treatment of prostate cancer, and preclinical and clinical (HERO trial)341 data suggest that GnRH antagonist use is associated with significantly lower overall mortality and CV events compared with agonists.342 However, more research is needed in this field. In the PRONOUNCE trial, no difference in MACE at 1 year was observed between degarelix (a GnRH antagonist) and leuprolide (a GnRH agonist), although the trial was stopped early.343 Lower CV event rates were detected compared with previous studies and all patients were reviewed by a cardiologist at enrolment (leading to optimal CVRF management).343 The main CV effects to be considered are hypertension, DM, ischaemic heart disease (IHD) and CTRCD.339,344 ADT is uncommonly associated with QTc prolongation and rarely causes torsade de pointes (TdP) through blockade of testosterone effects on ventricular repolarization.345,346 ECG monitoring and correction of QT prolongation precipitant factors (see Section 6.4.2; Table 9; Supplementary data, Table S13) is recommended340,347,348 during prostate cancer treatment if the baseline QTc interval is prolonged.49,339,340,347,349,350

Recommendation Table 15 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during immunotherapy

Recommendations Classa Levelb

ECG, NP, and cTn measurements are recommended in all patients before starting ICI therapy.333 I B Baseline echocardiography is recommended in high-risk patientsc before starting ICI therapy.333 I B Baseline echocardiography may be considered in all patients before starting ICI therapy. IIb C

Continued Serial ECG and cTn measurements should be

considered before ICI doses 2, 3, and 4, and if normal, reduce to every three doses until completion of therapy to detect subclinical ICI-related CV toxicity.333 IIa B CV assessmentd is recommended every 6–12 months in high-risk patientsc who require long-term (.12 months) ICI treatment.321– 323,335,336 I C CV assessmentd may be considered every 6–12 months in all patients who require long-term (.12 months) ICI treatment. IIb C © ESC 2022

BNP, B-type natriuretic peptide; BP, blood pressure; cTn, cardiac troponin; CTRCD, cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction; CV, cardiovascular; CVD, cardiovascular disease; ECG, electrocardiogram; HbA1c, glycated haemoglobin; ICI, immune checkpoint inhibitors; NP, natriuretic peptides; NT-proBNP, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cDual ICI, combination ICI-cardiotoxic therapy; ICI-related non-CV events, prior CTRCD, or CVD. dPhysical examination, BP, NP (BNP or NT-proBNP), lipid profile, HbA1c, and ECG. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

Goserelin

GnRH agonist

GnRH antagonist

Histrelin

Degarelix

Relugolix

Leuprorelin

Bicalutamide

Flutamide

Nilutamide

Apalutamide

Abirateroneb

Darolutamide

Enzalutamide

Triptorelin HTN HG/DM HF IHD/MI AF

Androgen deprivation therapy-related cardiovascular toxicities

1st generation antiandrogens

2nd generation androgen deprivation therapy

Androgen metabolism inhibitor

Very common: ≥10% incidence

Common: 1% to <10% incidence Uncommon: 0.1% to < 1% incidence

Rare: <0.1% incidence QTca

Figure 21 Androgen deprivation therapy-related cardiovascular toxicities. ADT, androgen deprivation therapy; AF, atrial fibrillation; DM, diabetes mellitus; EMA, European Medicines Agency; FDA, Food and Drug Administration; GnRH, gonadotropin-releasing hormone; HF, heart failure; HG, hyperglycaemia; HTN, hypertension; IHD, ischaemic heart disease; MedDRA, medical dictionary for regulatory activities; MI, myocardial infarction; ↑QTc, corrected QT interval prolongation; TdP, torsade de pointes. Adverse reactions reported in multiple clinical trials or during post-marketing use are listed by system organ class (in MedDRA) and frequency. If the frequency is unknown or cannot be estimated from the available data, a blank space has been left. aADT may prolong the QTc interval. In patients with a history of risk factors for QT prolongation and in patients receiving concomitant medicinal products that might prolong the QT interval, physicians should assess the benefit/risk ratio including the potential for TdP prior to initiating the treatment. bIncreased risk of QTc prolongation in combination with ADT.49,339,340,349,350 Figure developed from EMA prescribing information,252 FDA prescribing information.253 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

5.5.11 Endocrine therapies for breast cancer

Endocrine therapy is a common treatment as 65–70% of all early and metastatic BC patients develop hormone receptor-positive disease.22 Selective oestrogen receptor modulators (tamoxifen, toremifene) or aromatase inhibitors (AI) (letrozole, anastrozole, or exemestane) are recommended in early BC (EBC) according to menopausal status, comorbidities, and the risk of disease relapse. The use of AI in combination with cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitors is recommended as first- or second-line therapy in patient with hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative metastatic BC. The use of AI increases the risk of dyslipidaemia, metabolic syndrome, hypertension, HF, and MI.339 In the ATAC (‘Arimidex’ and Tamoxifen Alone or in Combination) trial, anastrozole-treated patients with pre-existing CAD experienced more CV events (17% vs. 10%) and cholesterol level elevation (9% vs. 5%) than those treated with tamoxifen.351,352 Similarly, HF was significantly more common with letrozole compared with tamoxifen in the BIG (Breast International Group) 1–98 trial.353 Longer AI treatment duration was associated with increased odds of developing CVD in two large meta-analyses.354,355 Significantly increased VTE risk has been consistently demonstrated with tamoxifen351,353 and it is not recommended in patients with thrombotic risks. Toremifene and high-dose tamoxifen were found to prolong QTc interval339,340; however, no risk data have been published in patients treated with the standard tamoxifen dose used in BC (20 mg/day).

The risks of VTE, hypercholesterolaemia, and CVD should be discussed with patients, while recognizing that the absolute benefits of preventing BC recurrence usually outweigh the CV risks.339 In patients ,70 years old without clinical manifestations of atherosclerotic disease, estimation of 10-year fatal and non-fatal CVD risk with SCORE2 (if ≥70 years, SCORE2-OP) is recommended.19 Cholesterol levels and BP should be monitored regularly in patients receiving AI.356 Physical activity and healthy diet are also advised to reduce weight and cholesterol levels. Smoking cessation is strongly recommended to reduce CV risk (e.g. CAD during AI therapy and VTE during tamoxifen therapy).

5.5.12 Cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors

The use of CDK 4/6 inhibitors (palbociclib, ribociclib, and abemaciclib) in combination with endocrine therapy is approved for the treatment of patients with hormone receptor-positive/ HER2-negative metastatic BC. This combination has resulted in improvements in progression-free survival and, in some trials, overall survival.357–359 CDK 4/6 inhibitors have demonstrated a potential for QT prolongation,339,360 particularly with ribociclib. The phase III trials of ribociclib incorporated routine ECG monitoring.361–368

Recommendation Table 16 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer

Recommendations Classa Levelb Baseline CV risk assessmentc and estimation of 10-year fatal and non-fatal CVD risk with SCORE2 or SCORE2-OPd is recommended in patients treated with ADT without pre-existing CVD.19,341,342 I B Baseline and serial ECGs are recommended in patients at risk of QTc prolongation during ADT therapy.e,339–342 I B A GnRH antagonist should be considered in patients with pre-existing symptomatic CADf who require ADT.341,342 IIa B Annual CV risk assessmentc is recommended during ADT.19,339,341,342 I B © ESC 2022

ACS, acute coronary syndromes; ADT, androgen deprivation therapy; BP, blood pressure; CAD, coronary artery disease; CCS, chronic coronary syndromes; CV, cardiovascular; CVD, cardiovascular disease; ECG, electrocardiogram; GnRH, gonadotropin-releasing hormone; HbA1c, glycated haemoglobin; QTc, corrected QT interval; SCORE2, Systematic Coronary Risk Estimation 2; SCORE2-OP, Systematic Coronary Risk Estimation 2—Older Persons. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cBP, lipids, fasting glucose, HbA1c, ECG, and patient education on healthy lifestyle and lifestyle risk factor control is recommended. dSCORE2 (,70 years) or SCORE2-OP (≥70 years) CV risk stratification: ,50 years: low risk ,2.5%, moderate risk 2.5% to ,7.5%, high risk ≥7.5%; 50–69 years: low risk ,5%; moderate risk 5% to ,10%; high risk ≥10%; ≥70 years: low risk ,7.5%, moderate risk 7.5% to ,15%, high risk ≥15%. eSee Table 9. fCCS and ACS. Recommendation Table 17 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during endocrine therapy for breast cancer

Recommendations Classa Levelb Baseline CV risk assessmentc and estimation of 10-year fatal and non-fatal CVD risk with SCORE2 or SCORE2-OPd,e is recommended in BC patients receiving endocrine therapies without pre-existing CVD.19 I C Annual CV risk assessmentc is recommended during endocrine therapy in BC patients with high 10-year risk of (fatal and non-fatal) CV events according to SCORE2/SCORE2-OP.d,e I C CV risk assessmentc should be considered every 5 years in BC patients with low or moderate 10-year risk of (fatal and non-fatal) CV events according to SCORE2/SCORE2-OP.d,e IIa C © ESC 2022

BC, breast cancer; BP, blood pressure; CV, cardiovascular; CVD, cardiovascular disease; ECG, electrocardiogram; HbA1c, glycated haemoglobin; SCORE2, Systematic Coronary Risk Estimation 2; SCORE2-OP, Systematic Coronary Risk Estimation 2— Older persons. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cBP, lipids, fasting glucose, HbA1c, ECG and patient education on healthy lifestyle and lifestyle risk factor control. dOr other validated CV risk scores. eSCORE2 (,70 years) or SCORE2-OP (≥70 years) CV risk stratification: ,50 years: low risk ,2.5%, moderate risk 2.5% to ,7.5%, high risk ≥7.5%; 50–69 years: low risk ,5%; moderate risk 5% to ,10%; high risk ≥10%; ≥70 years: low risk ,7.5%, moderate risk 7.5% to ,15%, high risk ≥15%.19 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

Baseline ECG is recommended and ECGs should be repeated at day 14 of the first cycle, before the second cycle, with any dose increase and as clinically indicated.357 In patients who already have, or are at significant risk of developing, QT prolongation (Section 6.4.2), the risks/benefits for ribociclib should be discussed by a MDT. Importantly, the use of ribociclib should be avoided in combination with drugs known to prolong QT interval and/or strong CYP3A inhibitors.357 The prescribing information does not recommend ribociclib in combination with tamoxifen due to a higher risk of QTc prolongation.252,367

5.5.13 Anaplastic lymphoma kinase inhibitors

Patients with cancer treated with anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitors may develop adverse CV events including sinus bradycardia, AV block, QTc prolongation, hypertension, hyperglycaemia, and dyslipidaemia.370,371 ACS and HF have rarely been described under crizotinib.372 A baseline ECG is recommended in patients prior to starting an ALK inhibitor, especially crizotinib, and patients may have an ECG 4 weeks after the start of treatment and every 3–6 months thereafter, particularly if the baseline ECG is abnormal. Home BP monitoring should be considered in patients treated with brigatinib or lorlatinib. Patients receiving lorlatinib or crizotinib treatment should have cholesterol levels checked every 3–6 months and treated if elevated.

5.5.14 Epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors

Osimertinib is an oral irreversible, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-TKI approved for patients with non-small cell lung cancer expressing EGFR mutations. Recent data have shown that osimertinib is associated with an increased risk of QTc prolongation, AF, VTE, LVD, and HF (Figure 22).373,374 A study of 123 patients with EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer treated with osimertinib reported a 4.9% incidence of HF or MI and a significant decrease in LVEF ,53% in 11% of patients with TTE surveillance.375 Pre-existing hypertension and older age are risk factors for LVD and HF (3.9% and 2.6% incidence, respectively).376 LVD and HF were more common during the first year of therapy.376 Baseline CV risk stratification, ECG and TTE prior to starting osimertinib is recommended. Three-monthly echocardiographic surveillance for new LVD during osimertinib treatment should be considered. Close monitoring of magnesium levels is also recommended to minimize the risk of osimertinib-induced hypomagnesaemia and QTc prolongation.

Recommendation Table 18 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during cyclindependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor therapy

Recommendations Classa Levelb QTcc,d monitoring is recommended at baseline and 14 and 28 days in all patients with cancer receiving ribociclib.361,365,367,368 I A QTcc,d monitoring is recommended in patients treated with ribociclib with any dose increase.361,365,367,368 I B QTcc monitoring should be considered in patients treated with palbociclib or abemaciclib who have a baseline QTc above the normal rangec or other conditions that may prolong the QTc interval.e IIa C © ESC 2022

QTc, corrected QT interval; QTcF, corrected QT interval using Fridericia correction. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cQT interval using Fridericia correction (QTcF = QT/3√RR) is the preferred method in patients with cancer. Upper 99% limit of normal for QTc values in the general population are 450 ms for men and 460 ms for women.369 dAccording to the European Medicines Agency: (1) ribociclib should be interrupted when QTcF . 480 ms; (2) if QTcF prolongation resolves to ,481 ms, resume treatment at the same dose level; (3) if QTcF ≥481 ms recurs, interrupt dose until QTcF resolves to ,481 ms and then resume ribociclib at next lower dose level. eSee Section 6.4.2 and Table 8. Recommendation Table 19 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during anaplastic lymphoma kinase and epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors

Recommendations Classa Levelb Baseline CV risk assessmentc is recommended in patients before ALK inhibitors and EGFR inhibitors. I C Baseline echocardiography is recommended in all patients with cancer before starting osimertinib.376 I B Home BP monitoring should be considered for patients treated with brigatinib, crizotinib, or lorlatinib. IIa C Cholesterol profile assessment every 3–6 months should be considered for patients on crizotinib and lorlatinib. IIa C Echocardiography should be considered every 3 months in patients during osimertinib therapy.376 IIa B ECG should be considered 4 weeks after starting therapy and every 3–6 months in patients during ALK inhibitor therapy. IIa C © ESC 2022

ALK, anaplastic lymphoma kinase; BP, blood pressure; CV, cardiovascular; ECG, electrocardiogram; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; HbA1c, glycated haemoglobin. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cPhysical examination, BP measurement, ECG, lipid profile, and HbA1c measurement. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

5.5.15 Chimeric antigen receptor

T cell and tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes therapies CAR-T therapy is used for the treatment of acute lymphocytic leukaemia and aggressive B-cell lymphomas.377 Although the reported incidence is variable, there is a growing recognition of the association between CAR-T therapy and CTR-CVT, including LVD, HF, cardiac arrhythmias, pericardial effusion, TTS, and cardiac arrest.378–383 The majority of the described CV toxicities have been shown to be associated with the occurrence of cytokine release syndrome (CRS).377,384 Baseline CV evaluation including ECG, NP, and cTn is recommended in all patients. Baseline TTE should also be considered, especially in patients with pre-existing CVRF and CVD. After receiving CAR-T therapy, patients may develop systemic inflammatory syndromes.385 CRS should be suspected when a patient develops fever, with or without tachypnoea, tachycardia, hypotension, hypoxia, and/or other end-organ dysfunction hours to days after treatment.385 A high index of suspicion is necessary to diagnose CRS and to distinguish it from other conditions that occur in these settings (infections, HF, drug reactions, and PE).378,386 Among adults, there was a relationship between CRS and CV events. An elevation in cTn is commonly seen in patients with CRS and is associated with an increased risk for subsequent CV events.378 In a recent retrospective pharmacovigilance study, CAR-T was associated with tachyarrhythmias (AF the most common, followed by ventricular arrhythmias), cardiomyopathy, and pleural and pericardial diseases.379 Globally, the fatality rate of CV and pulmonary adverse events was 30.9%.378,379,387 Early cardiac evaluation in patients with cTn increase should include NP, ECG, and echocardiography (see Section 6.1.4 for management).388

Adoptive cellular therapy with TIL has emerged as an effective treatment option for unresectable stage III/IV metastatic melanoma. With TILs, the CV toxicity appears to be related to direct myocardial and vascular toxicity.380 Baseline assessment and CV surveillance in patients before TIL therapies is the same pathway recommended for CAR-T therapies.

Alectinib

Brigantinib

Ceritinib

Crizotinib

Lorlatinib

Osimertiniba

ALK inhibitors

EGFR inhibitors HTN HF SBr DL HG/DM AF VTE

ALK inhibitor- and EGFR inhibitor-related cardiovascular toxicities

Very common: ≥10% incidence

Common: 1% to <10% incidence Uncommon: 0.1% to <1% incidence

Rare: <0.1% incidence QTc

Figure 22 Anaplastic lymphoma kinase and epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor-related cardiovascular toxicities. AF, atrial fibrillation; ALK, anaplastic lymphoma kinase; DL, dyslipidaemia; DM, diabetes mellitus; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; EMA, European Medicines Agency; FDA, Food and Drug Administration; HF, heart failure; HG, hyperglycaemia; HTN, hypertension; MedDRA, medical dictionary for regulatory activities; ↑QTc, corrected QT interval prolongation; SBr, sinus bradycardia; VTE, venous thromboembolism. Adverse reactions reported in multiple clinical trials or during post-marketing use are listed by system organ class (in MedDRA) and frequency. If the frequency is unknown or cannot be estimated from the available data, a blank space has been left. aOsimertinib increases the risk of hypomagnesaemia. Figure developed from EMA prescribing information,252 FDA prescribing information.253 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

5.5.16 Radiotherapy

RT increases the risk of developing subsequent CVD and peripheral artery disease (PAD).173,389–394 There is ongoing debate regarding the safest radiation dose, which cardiac substructures are most sensitive to RT-induced injury, and the most appropriate strategies to minimize RT-related CVD.395,396 The heart is considered a radiosensitive ‘organ at risk’ during RT and radiation exposure to the heart should be kept as low as reasonably achievable because there is no ‘safe’ dose (Figure 23).389,390 RT-induced CV toxicity risk categorization based on MHD389,397 is recommended over categorization based on prescribed dose, which may not accurately reflect cardiac radiation exposure (e.g. 35 Gray [Gy] prescribed dose to approximately 70% of the heart is equivalent to approximately 25 Gy MHD, whereas 35 Gy prescribed dose to approximately 40% of the heart is equivalent to approximately 15 Gy MHD). However, MHD is not a perfect metric, and in some patients, a very small portion of the heart might be irradiated to a very high dose, still conveying a substantial risk despite a low MHD.398 Therefore, depending on dose distribution and exposure of specific cardiac substructures and CVRFs, the cancer treatment team may judge the patient to belong to a higher-risk category.397,399–401 Strategies to prevent and attenuate CV complications of RT have focused on reducing radiation exposure of the heart and CV substructures during cancer treatment and include the following. (1) Modification of cancer management to omit RT. This emphasizes

the importance of integrating a personalized cardio-oncology evaluation.402–404 (2) Modification of the dose and volume of RT treatments where possible. RT protocols should target the minimum volume required to the minimum dose needed to obtain the desired clinical benefit. (3) Modification of delivery techniques to reduce cardiac radiation

exposure should lead to a considerable reduction in risk. Modern heart-sparing RT strategies include: the optimal use of modern intensity-modulated photon RT technologies; the use of deep inspiration breath-hold or respiratory-gated techniques in BC,405 lymphoma,406 and lung cancer407; or the use of imageguided RT to ensure accuracy of delivery and proton beam therapy.408

The incidence of cardiac events following RT may vary according to patient risk factors and synergistic effects of radiation with other cardiotoxic cancer treatments.12,173 There are no known RT-specific secondary preventative measures (e.g. drug treatments) to reduce the risk of CV events following RT. However, given the known importance of conventional CVRF on the incidence of RT-related events, optimization of modifiable CVRF is recommended in all patients before and after RT.

5.5.17 Haematopoietic stem cell transplantation

HSCT constitutes a potentially curative therapeutic option for many haematological malignancies. Improvements in HSCT techniques and supportive strategies have markedly decreased treatment-related mortality (Supplementary data, Table S14).409,410 There is a growing recognition of HSCT-related CV toxicities and HSCT survivors constitute a population at high future CV risk. Several factors contribute to define the risk of HSCT-related CV toxicities, including the HSCT

Recommendation Table 20 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment and monitoring in patients receiving chimeric antigen receptor T cell and tumourinfiltrating lymphocytes therapies

Recommendations Classa Levelb

Baseline ECG, NP, and cTn are recommended in all patients with cancer before starting CAR-T and TIL therapies.388 I C A baseline echocardiography is recommended in patients with pre-existing CVD before starting CAR-T and TIL therapies.388 I C A baseline echocardiography should be considered before starting CAR-T and TIL therapies.388 IIa C Measurement of NP, cTn, and echocardiography are recommended in patients who develop CRS of ASTCT ≥2.c,378,388 I C © ESC 2022

ASTCT, American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy; CAR-T, chimeric antigen receptor T cell; CRS, cytokine release syndrome; cTn, cardiac troponin; CVD, cardiovascular disease; ECG, electrocardiogram; NP, natriuretic peptides; TIL, tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cDetermine CRS grade according to ASTCT grading: Grade 1: fever; Grade 2: fever AND hypotension not requiring vasopressors AND/OR hypoxia requiring low-flow nasal oxygen; Grade 3: fever AND hypotension requiring one vasopressor + vasopressin AND/OR hypoxia requiring high-flow nasal cannula or facemask or non-rebreather mask or Venturi mask; Grade 4: fever AND hypotension requiring multiple vasopressors, not including vasopressin AND/OR hypoxia requiring positive airway pressure. Recommendation Table 21 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment of patients before radiotherapy to a volume including the heart

Recommendations Classa Levelb Baseline CV risk assessmentc and estimation of 10-year fatal and non-fatal CVD risk with SCORE2 or SCORE2-OPd is recommended.19,389 I B Baseline echocardiography should be considered in patients with previous CVD before RT to a volume including the heart. IIa C © ESC 2022

BP, blood pressure; CV, cardiovascular; CVD, cardiovascular disease; ECG, electrocardiogram; HbA1c, glycated haemoglobin; RT, radiotherapy; SCORE2, Systematic Coronary Risk Estimation 2; SCORE2-OP, Systematic Coronary Risk Estimation 2—Older Persons. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cBP, lipids, fasting glucose, HbA1c, ECG and patient education on healthy lifestyle and lifestyle risk factor control. dSCORE2 (,70 years) or SCORE2-OP (≥70 years) CV risk stratification: ,50 years: low risk ,2.5%, moderate risk 2.5% to ,7.5%, high risk ≥7.5%; 50–69 years: low risk ,5%; moderate risk 5% to ,10%; high risk ≥10%; ≥70 years: low risk ,7.5%, moderate risk 7.5% to ,15%, high risk ≥15%.19 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

type (higher risk after allogeneic HSCT), multiple uncontrolled CVRF, pre-existing CV conditions (AF or atrial flutter, sick sinus syndrome, ventricular arrhythmias, CAD, MI, moderate-to-severe VHD, and HF or LVEF ,50%),411 direct cardiotoxic effects of anticancer therapies received prior to and during HSCT (anthracyclinecombined induction regimen, mediastinal RT, total body irradiation, or cyclophosphamide-based conditioning regimen) (Supplementary data, Table S14) and the development of graft vs. host disease (GVHD), thrombotic microangiopathy, or sepsis.410,412 In the early phase following HSCT (,100 days), the most frequent CV event is AF, although some patients may experience HF, hypertension, hypotension, pericardial effusion, or VTE.413,414 Late toxicities include DM, dyslipidaemia, metabolic syndrome, hypertension, HF, CAD, conductions disorders, and pericardial effusion.410 Acute

>25 Gy MHDb

>15 Gy MHDb + cumulative doxorubicinc

≥100 mg/m2

Very high risk

>15 to 25 Gy MHDb

5 to 15 Gy MHDd+

cumulative doxorubicinc

≥100 mg/m2

5 to 15 Gy MHDd

<5 Gy MHDe + cumulative doxorubicinc ≥100 mg/m2 <5 Gy MHDe High risk

Moderate risk Low risk

RT doses CVa

toxicity risk

Low risk

Figure 23 Radiotherapy mean heart dose and associated cardiovascular toxicity risk. CV, cardiovascular; Gy, Gray; MHD, mean heart dose; RT, radiotherapy. aRT risk categorization based on MHD is recommended over categorization based on prescribed dose, which may not accurately reflect cardiac radiation exposure. Depending on dose distribution and exposure of specific cardiac substructures (as well as clinical risk factors) the treatment team may judge the patient to belong to a higher risk category. In addition, a patient may be judged to belong to a lower risk category if only a small part of the heart was exposed to a relatively low prescribed dose.397,399–401 bOr prescribed RT ≥35 Gy to a volume exposing the heart if MHD is not available. Note that in this case, the limited information about cardiac exposure does not allow one to distinguish between high- and very high-risk categories. cOr equivalent. dOr prescribed RT 15–34 Gy to a volume exposing the heart if MHD is not available. eOr prescribed RT , 15 Gy to a volume exposing the heart if MHD is not available. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

GVHD is associated with thrombosis and inflammatory myocardial damage (myocarditis, HF, conduction abnormalities, arrhythmias, and pericardial effusions), and chronic GVHD has been linked with increasing risk of hypertension, DM, and dyslipidaemia.415,416 A comprehensive CV evaluation, including NP assessment, ECG, and TTE, has become a core component of the pre-HSCT assessment409,410 to detect undiagnosed CVD, stratify CTR-CVT risk, and optimize pre-existing CV conditions.411,417–420 In early surveillance, TTE monitoring is recommended in high-risk HSCT recipients at 3 and 12 months as LVEF and GLS can decrease after transplant (see Section 7). Independent factors associated with long-term CVD in HSCT survivors are allogenic HSCT, pre-existing CVD or multiple uncontrolled CVRF, cancer treatment history (mediastinal or mantle field radiation, alkylating agents, .250 mg/m2 doxorubicin or equivalent), high-risk conditioning schemes (total body irradiation, alkylating agents), and GVHD.410 Figure 24 summarizes strategies for the prevention and attenuation of CV complications in patients undergoing HSCT.

Cardiovascular surveillance in patients referred for haematopoietic

stem cell transplantation

If new cardiac symptoms

occur at any time

If new cardiac symptoms

occur at any time

In selected patients

In selected patients

Low risk

Class 1 Class 1Ia Class 1Ib

ECG

TTE

CV assessmenta

NP

NP

ECG

TTE

CV assessmenta

CPET 3 M after HSCT 12 M after HSCT

>12 M (yearly) Before HSCT

High risk Allogenic HSCT Pre-existing CVD Multiple uncontrolled CVRF Cancer treatment historyb Conditioning schemesc GVHD

Figure 24 Risk factors and cardiovascular surveillance in patients referred for haematopoietic stem cell transplantation. BNP, B-type natriuretic peptide; BP, blood pressure; CPET, cardiopulmonary exercise testing; CV, cardiovascular; CVD, CV disease; CVRF, cardiovascular risk factors; ECG, electrocardiogram; GVHD, graft vs. host disease; HbA1c, glycated haemoglobin; HSCT, haematopoietic stem cell transplantation; M, months; NP, natriuretic peptides (including BNP or NT-proBNP); NT-proBNP, N-terminal pro-BNP; TTE, transthoracic echocardiography. aIncluding physical examination, BP, lipid profile, and HbA1c. bMediastinal or mantle field radiation, alkylating agents, .250 mg/m2 doxorubicin or equivalent. cTotal body irradiation, alkylating agents.

Recommendation Table 22 — Recommendations for baseline risk assessment in haematopoietic stem cell transplantation patients

Recommendations Classa Levelb

Baseline and serial CV risk assessment (3 and 12 months, then yearly) including BP measurement, ECG, lipid measurement, and HbA1c is recommended in HSCT patients. I C Echocardiography is recommended in all patients before HSCT. I C Baseline NP measurement should be considered before HSCT.417,418 IIa C © ESC 2022

BP, blood pressure; CV, cardiovascular; ECG, electrocardiogram; HbA1c, glycated haemoglobin; HSCT, haematopoietic stem cell transplantation; NP, natriuretic peptides. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

5.5.18 Other cancer treatments

Several other cancer therapies may also induce clinically relevant CV events. Cyclophosphamide, cisplatin, ifosfamide, and taxanes (paclitaxel and docetaxel) can induce myocardial dysfunction and HF.4 Cyclophosphamide CV toxicity is primarily seen in patients receiving high doses (.140 mg/kg) before HSCT and typically occurs within days of drug administration.410 Platinum-containing chemotherapy (cisplatin, carboplatin, oxaliplatin) may cause vascular disease (vasospasm, MI, and venous and arterial thrombosis). These may occur during treatment and also contribute to increased long-term risk of CAD in survivors. Patients with testicular cancer treated with cisplatin have a higher risk for vascular disease at long-term follow-up.421 The risk of the individual patient is still hard to predict, but lifestyle interventions, a high degree of clinical suspicion in patients who experience chest pain, and close CVRF monitoring is recommended during and after therapy.422 Cisplatin422 infrequently causes HF; however, because it requires the administration of a high i.v. volume to avoid renal toxicity, patients with pre-existing CVD may develop symptomatic HF. Arsenic trioxide is used to treat some leukaemias and myelomas. Arsenic trioxide frequently prolongs the QT interval (26–93% of patients), and life-threatening ventricular tachyarrhythmias have been reported.45,259 QTc prolongation was observed 1–5 weeks after arsenic trioxide infusion and then returned towards baseline by the end of 8 weeks. Patients receiving treatment with arsenic trioxide should be monitored weekly with ECG during the first 8 weeks of therapy. Electrolyte monitoring is also required as arsenic trioxide may induce hypokalaemia, hypomagnesaemia, and renal dysfunction. Risk factors for QT prolongation should be controlled before, during, and after cancer treatment (Section 6.4.2). Several FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3) inhibitors (first-generation: midostaurin; second-generation: gilteritinib) have been tested for the treatment of acute myeloid leukaemias. Gilterinib-induced differentiation syndrome (fever, dyspnoea, pleuropericardial effusion, pulmonary oedema, peripheral oedema, hypotension, renal dysfunction, and rash) requires early corticosteroid therapy and haemodynamic monitoring until resolution of symptoms. Midostaurin and gilterinib may prolong QTc interval and close electrolyte surveillance and minimizing drug–drug interactions are required (see Section 6.4.2; Table 9; Supplementary data, Tables S15 and S16).423

6 Diagnosis and management of

acute and subacute cardiovascular toxicity in patients receiving anticancer treatment

A coordinated MDT is recommended to discuss patients with cancer who develop acute CV complications of their cancer treatment.5 Referral to a specialized cardio-oncology service is recommended for patients with cancer who present with new CTR-CVT during and after cancer treatment.12 The prevention and management of CVD in patients with cancer should generally follow published ESC Guidelines for specific CVD. This chapter provides guidance on the management of CTR-CVT that occur during cancer treatment, and highlights where management differs for patients with cancer compared with those without. The decision to initiate CV treatment (medication, devices) needs to include consideration of a range of factors including both cancer and CV symptom burden, cancer prognosis, ongoing cancer treatment requirements including alternative options, possible adverse drug reactions, drug–drug interactions, and patient preferences. An extensive list of drug–drug interactions is provided in Supplementary data, Tables S15–S17.

6.1 Cancer therapy-related cardiac

dysfunction 6.1.1. Anthracycline chemotherapy-related cardiac dysfunction CTRCD during anthracycline chemotherapy may present clinically or be detected in asymptomatic patients during surveillance (Figure 10; Table 3).4 The diagnosis of anthracycline chemotherapy-related cardiac dysfunction includes new CV symptoms, new abnormalities in cardiac function on CV imaging, and/or new increases in cardiac biomarkers (Table 3). A MDT discussion is recommended to consider the risk/benefit ratio of continuing anthracycline chemotherapy in patients who develop new CTRCD. Discontinuation of anthracycline chemotherapy is recommended in patients with cancer who develop severe symptomatic CTRCD.22 There are rare exceptions where rechallenge with further anthracycline chemotherapy may be considered after a MDT discussion, using prevention strategies described below and under close monitoring with each cycle of anthracycline chemotherapy. Temporary interruption of anthracycline chemotherapy is recommended in patients who develop moderate symptomatic CTRCD, and in patients who develop moderate or severe asymptomatic CTRCD. A MDT approach regarding interruption vs. continuation of anthracycline chemotherapy is recommended in patients who develop mild symptomatic CTRCD. Guideline-based HF therapy is recommended in patients who develop symptomatic CTRCD or asymptomatic moderate or severe CTRCD during anthracycline chemotherapy. The use of an ACE-I/ ARB or angiotensin receptor–neprilysin inhibitor, a beta-blocker, a sodium–glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor, and a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist is recommended unless the drugs are contraindicated or not tolerated. Up-titration to target doses as described in the 2021 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic HF is recommended.14 ACE-I, ARB, and/or beta-blockers

Recommendation Table 23 — Recommendation for the management of cardiovascular disease and cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity in patients receiving anticancer treatment

Recommendation Classa Levelb A specialist CV assessmentc is recommended for optimal diagnostic workup and management of patients with cancer who present with new CV toxicity during and after cancer treatment.5 I C © ESC 2022

CV, cardiovascular; CVD, cardiovascular disease. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cCardio-oncology referral is recommended when available; alternatively, patients should be referred to a specialized cardiologist with expertise in managing CVD in patients with cancer. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

should be considered in mild asymptomatic CTRCD while anthracycline chemotherapy continues uninterrupted (Figure 25).1,14,102,424 The beneficial effects of aerobic exercise before and during anthracycline chemotherapy have been demonstrated and is recommended for patients with cancer who develop CTRCD.11 A MDT is recommended to discuss restarting anthracycline chemotherapy in patients who developed mild or moderate symptomatic CTRCD, or moderate or severe asymptomatic CTRCD, after recovery of LV function under HF treatment. If there is a compelling reason to continue anthracycline chemotherapy, three other strategies exist in addition to continuing ACE-I/ARB and beta-blockers at target doses for HF.14 First, minimizing the dose of anthracycline chemotherapy administered. Second, switching to liposomal anthracycline preparations. Third, pre-treatment

Disconti n ue

A C (Class I) Inte r rupt

A C (Class I) MDT a pp r oach

r ega r ding inte r ruption

vs . conti

. n uation

of A C (Class I) Inte r rupt

A C (Class I) Conti n ue

A C with CV monitoring

(Class I)

Symptomatic CTRCD a

V e V V r y s e v e r e/s e v e r e

Oncological strategy

CV strategy Moderate

MDT b Mild S e v e r e/moderate Mild

GLS dec r ease >15%

or cTn inc r ease

A CE-I/ARB and/or BB (Class IIb)

A CE-I/ARB and/or BB (Class IIa)

HF ther a p y

p p (Class I) NP inc r ease

Asymptomatic CTRCD a

Management of patients with A C- r elated ca r diac dysfunction

AND

MDT c

AND

MDT c

AND

Figure 25 Management of anthracycline chemotherapy-related cardiac dysfunction. AC, anthracycline chemotherapy; ACE-I, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors; ARB, angiotensin receptor blockers; BB, beta-blockers; cTn, cardiac troponin; CTRCD, cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction; CV, cardiovascular; GLS, global longitudinal strain; HF, heart failure; LV, left ventricular; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; MDT, multidisciplinary team; NP, natriuretic peptides. aSee Table 3 (Section 3) for complete definition (symptomatic CTRCD: symptomatic confirmed HF syndrome; asymptomatic severe CTRCD: LVEF , 40%; asymptomatic moderate CTRCD: LVEF 40–49%; asymptomatic mild CTRCD: LVEF . 50%). bIn rare exceptions, anthracycline chemotherapy may be restarted after recovery of LV function with optimal HF therapy. cA MDT discussion is recommended before restarting anthracycline chemotherapy after recovery of LV function. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

with dexrazoxane before each further cycle of anthracycline chemotherapy (Section 5.2.1). Close cardiac monitoring every 1–2 cycles is recommended in patients who restart anthracycline chemotherapy following an episode of CTRCD and in patients with mild asymptomatic CTRCD while they continue anthracycline chemotherapy.

6.1.2 Human epidermal receptor 2-targeted

therapy-related cardiac dysfunction The diagnosis of HER2-targeted therapy-related CTRCD can be made using the combination of new CV symptoms, imaging, and biomarkers. Patients may present with symptomatic CTRCD or may be asymptomatic.426 Early treatment of symptomatic and asymptomatic severe CTRCD (LVEF , 40%), according to the 2021 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic HF,14 is recommended to prevent worsening HF,425 particularly when targeted cancer therapy is continued.427 In patients who develop CTRCD, a MDT is recommended to guide clinical decisions. Temporary interruption is recommended in patients who develop moderate or severe symptomatic CTRCD or severe asymptomatic CTRCD (LVEF , 40%) during HER2-targeted therapy. In patients with mild symptomatic CTRCD, a MDT approach is recommended to continue vs. interrupt HER2-targeted therapy. In patients with asymptomatic moderate CTRCD (LVEF 40–49%), HER2-targeted treatment should be continued, and cardioprotective therapy (ACE-I/ARB and betablockers) is recommended with frequent cardiac monitoring.22,33,189 In patients with asymptomatic mild CTRCD (LVEF ≥ 50% with a significant new GLS reduction and/or cardiac biomarker increase), continuing HER2-targeted treatment is recommended and cardioprotective therapy (ACE-I/ARB and/or beta-blockers) should be considered.22,211,428,429 Frequent cardiac surveillance with cardiac imaging and cardiac serum biomarkers is recommended in all patients with CTRCD

Recommendation Table 24 — Recommendations for the management of cancer treatment-related cardiac dysfunction during anthracycline chemotherapy

Recommendations Classa Levelb

Anthracycline chemotherapy-induced symptomatic CTRCD HF therapy is recommended for patients who develop symptomatic CTRCD during anthracycline chemotherapy.c,208,425 I B Discontinuation of anthracycline chemotherapy is recommended in patients who develop symptomatic severe CTRCD.c I C Temporary interruption of anthracycline chemotherapy is recommended in patients who develop symptomatic moderate CTRCDc and a multidisciplinary approach regarding the decision to restart is recommended. I C A multidisciplinary approach regarding interruption vs. continuation of anthracycline chemotherapy is recommended in patients who develop mild symptomatic CTRCD.c I C Anthracycline chemotherapy-induced asymptomatic CTRCD Temporary interruption of anthracycline chemotherapy and initiation of HF therapy is recommended in patients who develop asymptomatic moderate or severe CTRCD.c,22 I C A multidisciplinary approach regarding the decision when to restart is recommended in all patients with moderate or severe asymptomatic CTRCD.c,22 I C Continuation of anthracycline chemotherapy is recommended in asymptomatic patients who have LVEF ≥50% and who have developed a significant fall in GLSc or a troponin or a NP elevation . ULN. I C Asymptomatic patients who have LVEF ≥50% and who have developed a significant fall in GLSc should be considered for ACE-I/ARB and/or beta-blockers.d,75,93,102 IIa B Asymptomatic patients who have LVEF ≥50% and who have developed a troponin elevation .ULN should be considered for ACE-I/ARB and/ or beta-blockers.d,147,211 IIa B

Continued Asymptomatic patients who have LVEF ≥50%

and who have developed NP .ULN may be considered for ACE-I/ARB and/or beta-blockers.d,211 IIb C Strategies for restarting anthracycline chemotherapy in patients with CTRCD Liposomal anthracyclinee may be considered in patients with moderate or severe symptomatic or asymptomatic CTRCDc who require further anthracycline chemotherapy to reduce the risk of further CV toxicity. IIb C Dexrazoxanef may be considered in patients with moderate or severe symptomatic or asymptomatic CTRCDc who require further anthracycline chemotherapy to reduce the risk of further CV toxicity. IIb C © ESC 2022

ACE-I, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors; ARB, angiotensin receptor blockers; CTRCD, cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction; CV, cardiovascular; GLS, global longitudinal strain; HF, heart failure; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; NP, natriuretic peptides; ULN, upper limit of normal. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cSee Table 3. Significant fall in GLS = relative reduction .15%. dAvoid hypotension. eSee text for specific liposomal doxorubicin type and malignancies (Section 5.2). fAs per the European Medicines Agency: ≥350 mg/m2 doxorubicin or equivalent; as per the United States Food and Drug Administration: ≥300 mg/m2 doxorubicin or equivalent. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

who continue HER2-targeted cancer therapies and in those who restart after an interruption following resolution of HF signs and symptoms and recovery of LVEF ≥40% (and ideally recovery to LVEF ≥50%) (Figure 26).22,33,189 Echocardiography and cardiac serum biomarker measurement every two cycles for the first four cycles after restarting HER2-targeted therapy is recommended, and then the frequency can be reduced if cardiac function and biomarker levels remain stable.

Anti-HER2 inte r ruption

(Class I) Anti-HER2

inte r ruption

(Class I)

MDT a pp r oach

r ega r ding inte r ruption vs . conti

. n uation of

anti-HER2 (Class I) c Conti n ue anti-HER2

under CV monitoring

(Class I)

Conti n ue anti-HER2 under CV monitoring

(Class IIa)

Symptomatic CTRCD a

Modera t

a a e t o v e r y s e v e r e

Oncological strategy

CV strategy Mild

MDT b ,c S e v e r e Moderate Mild

A CE-I/ARB and/or BB (Class IIa)

HF ther a p y

p p (Class I) Asymptomatic CTRCD a

Management of patients with HER2-targeted ther a pies r elated ca r diac dysfunction

AND

MDT b ,c

AND

GLS dec r ease >15% cT n a n d NP i nc r eas e

Figure 26 Management of human epidermal receptor 2-targeted therapy-related cardiac dysfunction. ACE-I, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors; ARB, angiotensin receptor blockers; BB, beta-blockers; cTn, cardiac troponin; CTRCD, cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction; CV, cardiovascular; GLS, global longitudinal strain; HER2, human epidermal receptor 2; HF, heart failure; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; MDT, multidisciplinary team; NP, natriuretic peptides. aSee Table 3 (Section 3) (symptomatic CTRCD: symptomatic confirmed HF syndrome; asymptomatic severe CTRCD: LVEF , 40%; asymptomatic moderate CTRCD: LVEF 40–49%; asymptomatic mild CTRCD: LVEF . 50%). bFor patients in whom HER2-targeted therapy has been interrupted, whose signs and symptoms of HF do not resolve and/or LVEF remains ,40%, resumption of HER2-targeted therapy may be considered if no alternative therapeutic option exists. In advanced cancer that only responds well to trastuzumab, the risk/benefit ratio may warrant continued therapy if other options remain limited.22 cFor patients where HER2-targeted therapy has been interrupted and who have recovered LVEF ≥40% and are now asymptomatic, resumption of HER2-targeted therapy should be considered, supported by HF therapy, and echocardiography and cardiac biomarker assessment every two cycles for the first four cycles after restarting and then the frequency can be reduced.22 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

6.1.3 Immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated

myocarditis and non-inflammatory heart failure Myocarditis is a severe complication of ICI with a high fatality rate that most frequently develops during the first 12 weeks of treatment, although late cases (after week 20) may occur.386 Other ICI-related CV toxicities include dyslipidaemia, ACS, vasculitis, AV block, supraventricular and ventricular arrhythmias, sudden death, TTS, non-inflammatory LVD, pericarditis, pericardial effusion, and ischaemic stroke, with higher risks for myocarditis (odds ratio 4.42) and dyslipidaemia (odds ratio 3.68) (Figure 27).323,325 The diagnosis of ICI-associated myocarditis is initially based on the presence of symptoms, a new increase in troponin (associated with either CV symptoms or non-CV immuno-related adverse events), and new ECG abnormalities (AV or intraventricular conduction disorders, bradycardia, tachyarrhythmias) (see Section 3; Table 3).17,434,435 Any abnormal finding should prompt urgent CV imaging and other causes of myocardial injury (e.g. ACS, acute infectious myocarditis) should be excluded. Treatment with high-dose methylprednisolone should be promptly initiated in haemodynamically unstable patients (including those with ventricular arrhythmias [VA] or complete AV block) while awaiting further confirmatory testing.436 TTE and CMR are recommended in all patients with suspected ICI-associated myocarditis. Currently, specific CMR features for ICI-induced myocarditis are not well described and modified Lake Louise criteria are recommended (Table 3).18 Cardiac fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (PET) may be considered437,438 if CMR is not available or contraindicated, although PET sensitivity is low and requires a strict 18-h carbohydrate-free fast.439 Endomyocardial biopsy (EMB) should be considered in cases where the diagnosis is suspected but not confirmed non-invasively (e.g. conflicting results of cardiac imaging and biomarkers or clinically unstable patients).440 All cases of ICI-associated myocarditis should be classified according to the severity of the myocarditis (fulminant

Recommendation Table 25 — Recommendations for the management of cancer treatment-related cardiac dysfunction during human epidermal receptor 2-targeted therapies

Recommendations Classa Levelb

HER2-targeted therapy-induced symptomatic CTRCD HF therapy is recommended for patients who develop symptomatic moderate-to-severe CTRCD with LVEF , 50%c during HER2-targeted treatment.14,61,430,431 I B Temporary interruption of HER2-targeted treatment is recommended in patients who develop moderate or severe symptomatic CTRCDc and the decision to restart should be based on a multidisciplinary approach after improvement of LV function and symptoms resolved.d I C In patients who develop mild symptomatic CTRCD,c HF therapy and a multidisciplinary approach regarding the decision to continue vs. interrupt HER2-targeted therapy are recommended.d,431,432 I C HER2-targeted therapy-induced asymptomatic CTRCD Temporary interruption of HER2-targeted therapy and initiation of HF therapy is recommended in patients who develop asymptomatic severe CTRCD.c I C A multidisciplinary approach regarding the decision to restart HER2-targeted treatment is recommended in patients with severe asymptomatic CTRCD.c I C Continuation of HER2-targeted therapy should be considered in patients who develop asymptomatic moderate (LVEF 40–49%) CTRCDc with more frequent cardiac monitoring.33,189,428,433 IIa B Continuation of HER2-targeted therapy is recommended in patients who develop asymptomatic mild (LVEF ≥50%) CTRCDc with more frequent cardiac monitoring.428 I C ACE-I/ARB and beta-blockers are recommended in patients who develop asymptomatic moderate (LVEF 40–49%) CTRCDc during HER2-targeted treatment.e,189 I C ACE-I/ARB and/or beta-blockers should be considered in asymptomatic patients receiving HER2-targeted therapies who have LVEF ≥50% but develop a significant fall in GLSc while continuing HER2-targeted therapy.e,22,428 IIa B

Continued ACE-I/ARB and/or beta-blockers should be

considered in asymptomatic patients receiving HER2-targeted therapies who have LVEF ≥50% but develop a new troponin or NP rise while continuing HER2-targeted therapy.e,22,211,428 IIa B © ESC 2022

ACE-I, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors; ARB, angiotensin receptor blockers; CTRCD, cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction; GLS, global longitudinal strain; HER2, human epidermal receptor 2; HF, heart failure; LV, left ventricular; LVEF, LV ejection fraction; NP, natriuretic peptides. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cSee Table 3. dFor patients where HER2-targeted therapy has been interrupted and who have recovered LVEF ≥40% and are now asymptomatic, resumption of HER2-targeted therapy should be considered supported by HF therapy and echocardiography and cardiac biomarkers assessment every two cycles for the first four cycles after restarting and then frequency can be reduced. eAvoid hypotension. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

or non-fulminant, including symptomatic but haemodynamically and electrically stable patients and incidental cases diagnosed at the same time as other immune-related adverse events) to guide the management pathway (Figure 28).331 Interruption of ICI treatment is recommended in all cases of suspected ICI-associated myocarditis (any patient developing new cardiac symptoms, new cardiac arrhythmias, new heart blocks, or new troponin increase who has received an ICI therapy in the past 12 weeks) while investigations are performed. Once the abnormal findings have resolved, a MDT discussion is recommended to determine the risk/benefit to permanent stopping vs. resuming ICI treatment in patients with suspected but not confirmed myocarditis. Cessation of ICI treatment is recommended in patients with cancer with fulminant or non-fulminant ICI-associated myocarditis and the patient should be admitted to hospital and a level 2 or 3 bed with continuous ECG monitoring is required. CV complications should be treated as per specific ESC Guidelines (HF,14 tachyarrhythmias,441,442 AV block,443 or pericardial effusion444).

Treatment of both non-fulminant and fulminant ICI-associated myocarditis with methylprednisolone 500–1000 mg i.v. bolus once daily for the first 3–5 days should be started as soon as possible, once the diagnosis is considered likely, to reduce MACE including mortality.386,436 If clinical improvement is observed (cTn reduced by .50% from peak level within 24–72 h and any LVD, AV block, and arrhythmias resolved), switching to oral prednisolone is

Direct CV Toxicity

Arrhythmias Arrhythmias Myocarditis Non-inflammatory HF

Takotsubo syndrome Pericarditis Vascular

Indirect CV Toxicity

Thyroid Adrenal Pituitary

Pancreas Embolism

Figure 27 Direct and indirect immune checkpoint inhibitor-related cardiovascular toxicity. CV, cardiovascular; HF, heart failure. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

recommended starting at 1 mg/kg up to 80 mg/day. Although the most appropriate weaning off protocol is not confirmed, a weekly reduction of oral prednisolone (most commonly by 10 mg per week) under clinical, ECG, and cTn surveillance should be considered (Figure 28). A reassessment of LV function and cTn should be considered when the prednisolone dose is reduced to 20 mg/day and then continue weaning the prednisolone by 5 mg per week to 5 mg/day, and a final reduction from 5 mg/day in 1-mg per week steps.

If the troponin does not reduce significantly (.50% reduction from peak) and/or AV block, ventricular arrhythmias, or LVD persist despite 3 days of i.v. methylprednisolone plus cardiac treatments, then steroid-resistant ICI-associated myocarditis is confirmed and second-line immunosuppression should be considered.22,445,446

Complete r ec o v e r y

Rec o v ering b Ste r oid r efracto r y Haemodynamical l y unstable

fulminant m y oca r ditis

Switching to oral p r ednisolone (1 mg/kg/d a y)

a a

(Class IIa) Second-line im m unosupp r ession

(Class IIa)

Met h ylp r ednisolone 500–1000 mg i. v .

v

v bolus once dai

. l y (mini m um 3 d a ys)

a a

(Class I)

Disconti n ue ICI ; hospital admission

; ; ECG monitoring

;

(Class I)

S e v erity (fulminant vs . non-fulminant)

. a

Admission to ICU (l e v el 3)

(Class I)

Optimal CV t r eatment

including MCS

(Class I)

W eaning p W W r otocol b y 10 mg/ w eek

with t r oponin monitoring

(Class IIa)

Management of patients with a definiti v e diagnosis of ICI- r elated m y oca r ditis

AND AND

Second-line im m unosupp r ession

(Class I)

AND

Figure 28 Diagnosis and management of immune checkpoint inhibitor-related myocarditis. CMR, cardiac magnetic resonance; CV, cardiovascular; ECG, electrocardiogram; HF, heart failure; ICI, immune checkpoint inhibitor; ICU, intensive care unit; i.v., intravenous; LGE, late gadolinium enhancement; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; MCS, mechanical circulatory support. aFulminant: haemodynamic instability, HF requiring non-invasive or invasive ventilation, complete or high-grade heart block, and/or significant ventricular arrhythmia. Non-fulminant: including symptomatic but haemodynamically and electrically stable patients and incidental cases diagnosed at the same time as other immuno-related adverse events. Patients may have reduced LVEF but no features of severe disease. bRecovering: ongoing improvement in patient clinical symptoms, signs, biomarkers, and imaging parameters, but not yet normalized, while on tapering doses of immunosuppression. Complete recovery: patients with complete resolution of acute symptoms, normalization of biomarkers, and recovery of LVEF after discontinuation of immunosuppression. CMR may still show LGE or elevated T1 due to fibrosis, but any suggestion of acute oedema should be absent. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

There is a lack of data to recommend a specific second-line immunosuppression regimen and MDT discussion is recommended. Several agents are currently being investigated with promising results from case series including i.v. mycophenolate mofetil, anti-thymocyte globulin (anti-CD3 antibody), i.v. immunoglobulin, plasma exchange, tocilizumab, abatacept (CTLA-4 agonist), alemtuzumab (anti-CD52 antibody), and tofacitinib. Caution is advised against the use of infliximab for steroid-refractory myocarditis and HF.447,448 Patients with fulminant ICI-associated myocarditis, complicated by haemodynamic and/or electrical instability, require admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) and cardiogenic shock should be managed according to the 2021 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic HF.14 A single dose of i.v. methylprednisolone should be considered in clinically unstable patients with cancer where ICI-induced myocarditis is suspected at presentation but before definitive diagnosis can be confirmed. Following recovery from ICI-associated myocarditis and weaning of oral steroid therapy, MDT discussion is recommended to review the decision on whether to restart ICI treatment. This depends on various factors including the severity of the ICI-associated myocarditis (fulminant vs. non-fulminant vs. asymptomatic), alternative oncology treatment options, metastatic vs. adjuvant/neoadjuvant indication, and reducing from dual ICI to single ICI treatment if triggered by combination ICI treatment.449 Non-inflammatory HF syndromes have also been observed in patients treated with ICI. These include TTS, non-inflammatory HF or LVD,450 and post-MI HF.451,452 Non-inflammatory HF is generally a late event and the diagnostic workflow should be based on defining the HF phenotype and excluding myocarditis, TTS, and ACS.14 There is also evidence that vasculitis and CAD can occur after ICI treatment.335 HF treatment as per the 2021 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic HF is indicated,14 but there is no indication for immunosuppression if myocarditis has been excluded. Interruption vs. continuing ICI therapy depends on the severity of the HF syndrome and each case should be reviewed by a MDT. Arrhythmias, such as AF, can be seen in patients with ICI therapy without myocarditis (e.g. ICI-associated thyroiditis with thyrotoxicosis, ICI-associated pericarditis, or ICI-associated severe systemic inflammatory syndromes). ICI treatment can be continued after excluding myocarditis.

Recommendation Table 26 — Recommendations for the diagnosis and management of immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated myocarditis

Recommendations Classa Levelb cTn, ECG, and CV imaging (echocardiography and CMR) are recommended to diagnose ICI-associated myocarditis.320,434,435,453 I B In patients with suspected ICI-associated myocarditis, temporary interruption of ICI treatment is recommended until the diagnosis is confirmed or refuted. I C

Continued EMB should be considered to confirm the diagnosis of ICI-associated myocarditis if the diagnosis is suspected but not confirmed after cardiac imaging and biomarkers.c IIa C

Interruption of ICI treatment is recommended in patients with confirmed ICI-associated myocarditis. I C Continuous ECG monitoring to assess for new AV block and tachyarrhythmias during the acute phase is recommended for all patients with symptomatic ICI-associated myocarditis. I C Early high-dose corticosteroidsd are recommended in patients with cancer and confirmed ICI-associated myocarditis.22,436,454 I C Continuation of high-dose corticosteroids is recommended for the treatment of ICI-associated myocarditis until resolution of symptoms, LV systolic dysfunction, conduction abnormalities, and significant cTn reduction.e I C Switching from i.v. to oral prednisolone should be considered after clinical improvement (resolution of: symptoms, LV systolic dysfunction, conduction abnormalities, and significant cTn reductione).f IIa C Second-line immunosuppression treatment should be considered in patients with steroid-refractory ICI-associated myocarditis.g IIa C Admission to ICU (level 3), treatment with i.v. methylprednisolone, and optimal CV treatment including mechanical support (when indicated) is recommended for patients with ICI-associated fulminant myocarditis.14 I C A single dose of i.v. methylprednisoloned should be considered in unstableh patients with cancer where ICI-induced myocarditis is suspected. IIa C A multidisciplinary discussion is recommended before restarting ICI treatment in selected patients with previous uncomplicated ICI-associated myocarditis. I C © ESC 2022

AV, atrioventricular; CMR, cardiac magnetic resonance; cTn, cardiac troponin; CV, cardiovascular; ECG, electrocardiogram; EMB, endomyocardial biopsy; HF, heart failure; ICI, immune checkpoint inhibitors; ICU, intensive care unit; i.v., intravenous; LGE, late gadolinium enhancement; LV, left ventricular; LVD, LV dysfunction; LVEF, LV ejection fraction. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cSee Table 3 for ICI-related myocarditis definition. EMB should be considered in unstable patients or when CMR is contraindicated. dEarly: ≤24 h; high-dose corticosteroids (methylprednisolone 500–1000 mg/day). eReduction of cTn by .50% from peak level. fComplete recovery: Patients with complete resolution of acute symptoms, normalization of biomarkers, or reduction of cTn by .50% from peak level and recovery of LVEF after discontinuation of immunosuppression are considered to have achieved complete recovery. CMR may still show LGE or elevated T1 due to fibrosis but any suggestion of acute oedema should be absent. Incomplete recovery: (1) an increase in symptoms or biomarkers of myocarditis or an inability to taper immunosuppression without a clinical or biomarker flare; (2) patients with persistent LVD despite resolution of acute symptoms with immunosuppression. gSteroid refractory: non-resolving or worsening myocarditis (clinical worsening or persistent troponin elevation after exclusion of other aetiologies) despite high-dose methylprednisolone (Table 3; Supplementary data, Table S1). hUnstable: patients with symptomatic HF, ventricular arrhythmias, new complete heart block. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

6.1.4 Chimeric antigen receptor T cell and

tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes therapies and heart dysfunction Although no large-scale studies on the multiple CV complications among adults treated with CAR-T therapies exist, small studies and case reports have shown that CV complications represent around 20% of adverse events.378 CV complications are associated with high mortality rates, and are secondary to CRS and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome. The most common CV complications in patients receiving CAR-T therapies are arrhythmias (77.6%), including QTc prolongation, ventricular arrhythmias, and AF; HF (14.3%); and MI and VTE (0.5%).455 When suspected, a resting 12-lead ECG, continuous ECG monitoring, TTE, and cTn and NP are recommended. Admission to ICU (level 3) is recommended in severe cases due to the risk of malignant cardiac arrhythmias, circulatory collapse, and multiorgan system failure. In general, the degree of elevation of cytokines correlates with the severity of CRS. C-reactive protein is not specific for CRS and changes in C-reactive protein may lag behind clinical changes by ≥12 h. A dramatic elevation of interleukin-6 is a supportive finding for the diagnosis of CRS. Management of the specific CV complication should follow ESC Guidelines, with additional management of the CRS (e.g. the anti-interleukin-6 receptor antibody, tocilizumab, and dexamethasone).381

Rec o v e r y of function

MDT (Class I) N

Diagnosis and management w orkup in patients with cance r -

r r r elated T a

T

T k otsubo synd

k

k r ome

AND Co r ona r y angiogr a p h y

(i n vasi v e or CC T A)

T T

to exclude A CS

(Class I) CMR

to exclude m y oca r ditis and

m y oca r dial infa r ction

(Class I)

AND

Y

Clinical e valuation ECG TTE Ca r diac serum biomar k ers

k k

AND Inte r ruption of the

culprit cancer drug

(Class I)

A v A A oid Q T -p

T T r olonging drugs (Class III)

Consider r esuming cancer

t r eatment under close

monitoring

(Class I) MDT a pp r oach r ega r ding

inte r ruption vs r esuming the culprit cancer drug

F or ICI- r elated TTS: met h ylp r ednisolone

(1000 mg i. v .)

v v

AND

CCU/HDU/ICU admission ECG monitoring

Figure 29 Diagnosis and management workup in cancer-related Takotsubo syndrome. ACS, acute coronary syndromes; CCTA, coronary computed tomography angiography; CCU, coronary care unit; CMR, cardiac magnetic resonance; ECG, electrocardiogram; HDU, high-dependency unit; ICI, immune checkpoint inhibitor; ICU, intensive care unit; i.v., intravenous; MDT, multidisciplinary team; N, no TTE, transthoracic echocardiography; TTS, Takotsubo syndrome; Y, yes. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

Although CV complications are common with TIL therapies, survival does not appear to be significantly affected. The most frequent CV events are hypotension that may require treatment with i.v. fluids and pressors, AF, and to a lesser extent, cTn elevation suggestive of myocardial damage.380 Further research is needed to define mechanisms and potential prevention strategies to help clinicians with the management of these CV events.

6.1.5 Heart failure during haematopoietic stem cell

transplantation CV complications during HSCT, including congestive HF,456 arterial events, tamponade, and rhythm disturbances (AF, atrial flutter, and supraventricular tachycardia),457 are uncommon but clinically relevant, and should be treated as per specific ESC Guidelines (HF,14 tachyarrhythmias,273,441 pericardial effusion,444 or acute coronary syndrome458). Studies of treatments during HSCT to prevent both acute and late CV toxicity are limited.145 ACE-I and beta-blockers may be effective, but this requires further confirmation. Outpatient and home-based exercise and education programmes instituted after HSCT can improve exercise capacity and quality of life,459 and the role of exercise pre-habilitation prior to HSCT is being investigated.460,461

6.1.6 Takotsubo syndrome and cancer

The prevalence of malignant diseases is high in patients with TTS and is a risk factor for worse outcomes. Malignancy itself, some cancer treatments (5-FU, ICI, VEGFi), and the stress associated with the diagnosis, investigations, and treatment are recognized triggers or predisposing factors for TTS.462–466 Diagnosis using general TTS criteria is recommended.467,468 Investigations in a patient with cancer with suspected TTS should include clinical examination, ECG, TTE, cardiac biomarkers (cTn and NP), and CMR (Figure 29).468,469 Most patients require invasive coronary angiography to exclude acute MI. In patients with advanced malignancy or significant thrombocytopaenia where invasive coronary angiography is contraindicated, a CCTA is recommended. Cardiac imaging studies should be performed as early as possible when the diagnosis is suspected as LVD can be transient, and if significant LVD is detected then repeat imaging to confirm recovery is recommended. Interruption of the culprit cancer drug in patients with TTS is recommended. QT-prolonging drugs should be avoided.467 In cases of ICI-associated TTS, the role of immunosuppression is unknown and if myocardial inflammation is present in a TTS pattern on CMR then i.v. methylprednisolone is recommended given the overlap between ICI-induced TTS and ICI-induced myocarditis. Limited information exists regarding the feasibility of ICI rechallenge following TTS and after recovery of LV function. A MDT discussion is recommended after recovery from the acute phase of TTS and, if restarting the culprit cancer drug is required from an oncology perspective, regular cardiac biomarker monitoring is recommended (e.g. cTn and NP measured before every ICI cycle, and TTE if a new rise in cardiac biomarkers occurs) (Figure 29). 6.2 Coronary artery disease

6.2.1. Acute coronary syndromes Patients with cancer are at increased risk of CAD because of shared CVRFs34 and CV toxicity of cancer therapy12 compounded by a cancer-induced pro-inflammatory and prothrombotic state (Table 7).467,468,470–473 Current knowledge on ACS in patients with cancer is based on observational data and registries demonstrating that, especially when diagnosed within 1 year, they are at increased risk for major CV events, bleeding, and cardiac and non-cardiac mortality.474–480 The proportion of ACS patients with a diagnosis of cancer is rising and constitutes about 3% of large series.475 Diagnosis of ACS is based on the same principles as in patients without cancer, including symptoms, an early 12-lead ECG, and serial measurements of hs-cTn for patients presenting with possible non-ST-segment elevation ACS (NSTE-ACS).458 Clinical presentation can be atypical481 or masked by cancer or therapy-related side effects; therefore, diagnostic suspicion should be increased in patients at high CV risk or treated with vascular cardiotoxic therapies

Recommendation Table 27 — Recommendations for the diagnosis and management of Takotsubo syndrome in patients with cancer

Recommendations Classa Levelb

Coronary angiography (invasive or CCTA) is recommended to exclude ACS. I C CMR is recommended to exclude myocarditis and MI.458 I B QT-prolonging drugs are not recommended during the acute TTS phase.c III C © ESC 2022

ACS, acute coronary syndromes; CMR, cardiac magnetic resonance; CCTA, coronary computed tomography angiography; LV, left ventricular; MI, myocardial infarction; QTc, corrected QT interval; TTS, Takotsubo syndrome. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cUntil full recovery and normalization of LV function and QTc.

Table 7 Cancer treatments that predispose to acute coronary syndromes Accelerated atherosclerosis and plaque rupture ADT (GnRH agonists), ICI, nilotinib,

ponatinib, radiation therapy, VEGFi

Vasospasm Bleomycin, fluoropyrimidines, taxanes,

VEGFi, vinca alkaloids

Coronary thrombosis Alkylating agents (cisplatin,

cyclophosphamide), erlotinib, ICI, IMiD (lenalidomide, thalidomide), monoclonal antibodies (VEGFi, anti-CD20), nilotinib, platinum chemotherapy, PI, ponatinib, VEGFi. © ESC 2022

ADT, androgen deprivation therapy; GnRH, gonadotropin-releasing hormone; ICI, immune checkpoint inhibitors; IMiD, immunomodulatory drugs; PI, proteasome inhibitors; VEGFi, vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

(Table 7). Echocardiography improves the diagnostic precision in patients with atypical symptoms and assesses for other cardiac causes of chest pain. Management of ACS in patients with cancer can be challenging because of frailty, increased bleeding risk, thrombocytopaenia, increased thrombotic risk, and the possible need for future surgery/interventions.482 Cancer treatment should be temporarily interrupted, and an urgent multidisciplinary approach5 is indicated to plan an individualized guideline-based management, taking into account cancer status, prognosis, and the patient’s preferences regarding invasive management. As in patients without cancer, admission to a monitored unit and initiation of appropriate anti-ischaemic and antithrombotic treatment are indicated, in the absence of contraindications. A large retrospective propensity score-matching analysis found that percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), despite its lower use, was strongly associated with lower adjusted MACE and all-cause mortality in patients with cancer (Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphomas and breast, lung, colon, and prostate cancers).483 Therefore, immediate coronary angiography and PCI are recommended in patients with cancer and ACS if cancer prognosis is ≥6 months or if they have acute complications of ACS (cardiogenic shock, pulmonary oedema, ventricular tachyarrhythmias), where PCI offers palliation of symptoms.483 When stenting is indicated, third-generation drug-eluting stents are preferred because of the lower risk of in-stent thrombosis. Balloon angioplasty is associated with worse outcome474 and should only be used in case of severe thrombocytopaenia or need for urgent surgery. Fractional flow reserve or instantaneous free wave ratio are advised by experts484 to avoid unnecessary interventions while intravascular ultrasound and optical coherence tomography can be used to ensure optimal stent apposition and expansion, to avoid thrombotic complications.485 Retrospective data have demonstrated a lower use of invasive management in patients with cancer with ST-segment elevation MI (STEMI), with a better outcome for invasively treated patients.475,480,483 PCI has not demonstrated a mortality benefit in patients with advanced cancer and NSTE-ACS compared with optimal medical therapy.479 Therefore, a non-invasive approach can be attempted in low-risk (without signs or symptoms of ongoing ischaemia or haemodynamic instability) NSTE-ACS patients with poor cancer prognosis (,6 months). Due to a potentially higher bleeding risk (especially in patients with active GI cancer),477 the preferred antithrombotic strategy after drug-eluting stent consists of DAPT with aspirin and clopidogrel instead of newer P2Y12 antagonists. The duration of DAPT should be kept as short as possible (1–3 months).458 In patients with need for therapeutic anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy, a NOAC and single oral antiplatelet (preferably clopidogrel) is the default strategy after a short period of triple antithrombotic therapy (up to 1 week in hospital).458 Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery can be considered in patients with extensive CAD who are not amenable with PCI, after MDT discussion and where cancer prognosis is .12 months. Thrombocytopaenia (platelet count , 100 000/μL) is present in about 10% of patients with cancer and may complicate ACS management. Based on a small series, coronary angiography can be safely performed in these patients when preventative measures to avoid bleeding are taken: platelet transfusion before catheterization (for platelets ,20 000/μL), radial access, careful haemostasis, and the use of a lower heparin dose (30–50 U/kg).486 Antiplatelets should not be withheld unless platelet count is ,10 000/μL for aspirin or ,30 000/μL for clopidogrel. For PCI and CABG, experts advise minimum platelet counts of 30 000/μL and 50 000/μL, respectively.484

In case of MI with non-obstructive coronary arteries, CMR may be considered to detect other causes of myocardial injury, especially myocarditis and TTS. When acute ischaemia is provoked by cancer therapy, alternative cancer therapies should be considered after a MDT discussion. In the case of coronary vasospasm secondary to fluoropyrimidines, and in the absence of an alternative therapy, a rechallenge, although controversial, can be considered in a monitored unit after exclusion of severe CAD (CT or coronary angiography) and after initiation of prophylactic therapy with long-acting nitrates and calcium channel blockers (CCB).487–489 Following ACS, a review of the cancer medications is recommended, and any cancer drug associated with thrombosis and MI should be stopped. Restarting cancer drugs associated with acute thrombosis and MI after ACS (Table 7) should occur only after a MDT to explore other cancer therapies, with appropriate patient education and consent. Cancer therapies not associated with MI can be restarted once revascularization, where indicated, has been completed and the patient is stabilized on ACS medical therapy without complications.

Recommendation Table 28 — Recommendations for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients receiving anticancer treatment

Recommendations Classa Levelb

An invasive strategy is recommended in patients with cancer presenting with STEMI or high-risk NSTE-ACS with life expectancy ≥6 months.475,479,483 I B A conservative non-invasive strategy should be considered in patients with poor cancer prognosisc (with life expectancy ,6 months) and/ or very high bleeding risk presenting with STEMI or NSTE-ACS.479 IIa C A temporary interruption of cancer therapy is recommended in patients where the cancer therapy is suspected as a contributing cause.d,10,490 I C A short DAPT strategy should be considered in patients with cancer with very high bleeding risk treated with PCI for an ACS.e IIa C

Continued Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

6.2.2 Chronic coronary syndromes

Several cancer treatments are associated with an increased risk of stable angina and chronic coronary syndromes (CCS).491 5-FU and capecitabine can precipitate effort angina in some cases.4,482,492 Platinum-containing chemotherapy-induced ischaemia usually occurs after one of the first three cycles and in patients with underlying CAD.493 The incidence of cardiac ischaemia is 1–5% with antimicrotubule agents, 2–3% with small-molecule VEGF-TKI, and 0.6–1.5% with VEGFi monoclonal antibody therapies.492 Nilotinib, ponatinib,494 and ICI335 also accelerate atherosclerosis, which can lead to stable angina. Patients receiving cancer therapy who present with new stable angina should have careful clinical evaluation, with aggressive CVRF modification and an initial medical management of their symptoms.484 The diagnosis and management of CAD should follow the 2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of chronic coronary syndromes.100 The management of CCS is similar in patients with and without cancer, in accordance with guideline recommendations.100 However, in the setting of CCS, decisions regarding coronary revascularization should be undertaken by a MDT that includes cardio-oncology, intervention, and oncology specialists.5 PCI in patients with cancer is associated with an increased risk of bleeding, 90-day readmissions for acute MI, in-hospital and longterm mortality, and the need for repeat revascularization, with the magnitude of risk depending on both cancer type and stage.495,496 The excess bleeding risk should be mitigated by keeping the duration of DAPT as short as possible.497,498 The risk is higher in patients with a cancer diagnosis within the preceding year.477 6.3 Valvular heart disease

New or worsening VHD in patients with cancer may be related to coexisting conditions, including CTRCD, ACS, PH, endocarditis, cardiac tumours, and mechanical prosthetic valve thrombosis.499,500 Pre-existing severe VHD is associated with an increased risk of CTRCD,12,501–503 and may also pose a risk for cancer surgery outcomes. In patients with mechanical prosthetic valves, the risk of thrombosis vs. bleeding should be carefully balanced during chemotherapy treatment. In patients with severe VHD diagnosed at baseline assessment, a MDT is required before cancer therapy to decide the best treatment option. Cardiac surgery is frequently challenging in patients with cancer because of comorbidities, frailty, mediastinal fibrosis due to prior RT, impaired wound healing, and the need for urgent oncology treatment (surgery, chemotherapy, targeted cancer therapies that effect wound healing). Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) may be a viable option for patients with cancer with severe aortic stenosis to limit recovery time and delays in starting cancer treatment.504–506 Patients with cancer suspected of new or worsening VHD, such as dyspnoea or a new cardiac murmur, or those with fever and positive blood cultures, should be screened for endocarditis and managed according to the recommendations from the 2021 ESC/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) Guidelines for the management of VHD,507 while considering the cancer-related prognosis. If valve surgery or percutaneous valve treatment is indicated in a patient receiving cancer treatment, then a MDT is recommended regarding type of valve treatment and periprocedural management of cancer treatments.

In patients with cancer, thrombocytopaenia, and ACS, aspirin is not recommended if platelets ,10 000/μL. III C In patients with cancer, thrombocytopaenia, and ACS, clopidogrel is not recommended if platelets ,30 000/μL and prasugrel or ticagrelor are not recommended if platelets ,50 000/μL. III C Ticagrelor or prasugrel may be considered in patients with cancer with low bleeding risk and excessive thrombotic risk who are treated with PCI for ACS. IIb C © ESC 2022

ACS, acute coronary syndromes; CrCl, creatinine clearance; CV, cardiovascular; DAPT, dual antiplatelet therapy; GI, gastrointestinal; GU, genitourinary; NSTE-ACS, non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention; STEMI, ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction; ULN, upper limit of normal. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cRelated to advanced cancer stage and/or severe irreversible non-CV comorbidities. dAnticancer therapies associated with high risk of ACS (very common [.10%]): capecitabine, paclitaxel, cisplatin, carfilzomib, bevacizumab, ramucirumab, aflibercept, axitinib, sorafenib, pazopanib, cabozantinib, lenvatinib, ponatinib, erlotinib. eHigh risk of GI or GU bleeding, significant drug–drug interactions, severe renal dysfunction (CrCl , 30 mL/min), significant liver disease (alanine aminotransferase/ aspartate aminotransferase .2 × ULN), or significant thrombocytopaenia (platelet count , 50 000/μL). Recommendation Table 29 — Recommendation for the management of chronic coronary syndromes in patients receiving anticancer treatment

Recommendation Classa Levelb

Individualized duration of DAPT is recommended in patients with cancer with CCS, following revascularization, based upon thrombotic/ ischaemic and bleeding risk, type and stage of cancer, and current cancer treatment.100,498 I C © ESC 2022

CCS, chronic coronary syndromes; DAPT, dual antiplatelet therapy. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence.

Recommendation Table 30 — Recommendations for the management of valvular heart disease in patients receiving anticancer treatment

Recommendations Classa Levelb

In patients with cancer and pre-existing severe VHD, management according to the 2021 ESC/ EACTS Guidelines for the management of VHD is recommended, taking into consideration cancer prognosis and patient preferences.507 I C

Continued Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

6.4 Cardiac arrhythmias

6.4.1. Atrial fibrillation AF may occur in patients with cancer in different settings: it may be a marker of cancer type or occult cancer, or it may develop in patients undergoing surgery, chemotherapy, or RT.508,509 All types of cancer show an increased risk of AF compared with the control group, but the risk of AF depends on the cancer type and stage.510,511 AF during a cancer treatment may be caused by a specific therapy or interaction with a pre-existing substrate in older patients with cancer. During cancer therapy AF may occur with a frequency ranging from 2% to 16%, according to a variety of factors,4,490,508,512–514 and may present either as first-diagnosed AF or as recurrence of paroxysmal AF. The risk of developing AF is greater in patients older than 65 years and/or with pre-existing CVD.4,509,512,515 Cancer surgery is associated with a variable rate of AF occurrence, with the highest incidence reported for lung surgery, ranging from 6% to 32%, but with occurrence also in cases of non-thoracic surgery (e.g. 4–5% after colectomy).509 Many anticancer drugs have been associated with an increased risk of AF both in terms of incident and recurrent AF (Supplementary data, Table S18).251 AF may occur shortly after treatment516 or weeks or months after starting treatment.517,518 The pathophysiology of AF associated with cancer is complex and has been extensively reviewed elsewhere (Figure 30).509 In patients with cancer, the occurrence of AF is associated with a two-fold higher risk of systemic thromboembolism/stroke and a sixfold increase in the risk of HF.4,509,512 The coexistence of cancer increases the risk of all-cause mortality, major bleeding, and intracranial haemorrhage in patients with AF. The association between cancer and ischaemic stroke differs between cancer types, and in some types, the risk of bleeding seems to exceed the thromboembolic risk.519 The management of AF in patients with cancer should follow the 2020 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation273 and the ‘ABC pathway’ (Atrial fibrillation Better Care) approach should be applied (A: Anticoagulation to avoid stroke/systemic embolism, B: Better symptom control with rate- and/or rhythm-control drugs and interventions, and C: Comorbidities and CVRF management, including lifestyle changes).273,520 The acute management of AF in patients with cancer should consider electrical cardioversion in cases of haemodynamic instability,521 while in others, the alternative between rate and rhythm control has several important considerations specific to patients with cancer. Drugs for rhythm control may lead to QT-interval prolongation,369 frequently have drug–drug interactions with cancer therapies, or may have a limited efficacy if a cancer therapy is the specific cause of the AF.508 Among rate-control drugs, beta-blockers are preferred, especially if the cancer therapies have potential CTRCD risk, whereas diltiazem and verapamil should be avoided where possible due to their drug–drug interactions and negative inotropic effects.508 The possibility of AF ablation should be discussed in selected patients with HF/LVD and/or uncontrolled symptoms, taking into consideration cancer status and prognosis in the context of a MDT approach.522

A complex issue in patients with cancer with new AF is risk stratification for stroke/systemic embolism, which according to guidelines, should be based on the CHA2DS2-VASc score (Congestive heart failure, Hypertension, Age ≥75 years [2 points], Diabetes mellitus, Stroke [2 points]—Vascular disease, Age 65–74 years, Sex category [female]).273,523,524 The CHA2DS2-VASc score has not been extensively validated in patients with cancer.525 In a large cohort of patients with AF, the predictive value of the CHA2DS2-VASc score was lower in patients with cancer than in those without, but a progressive increase in the risk of ischaemic stroke according to the CHA2DS2-VASc score was also found in AF patients with cancer (from 0.9% per year to 8.9% per year).519 However, the scope of this score is not to identify high-risk patients, but rather to identify low-risk individuals in whom anticoagulation can be avoided. A study based on the Danish healthcare system data set found that CHA2DS2-VASc scores of 0 and 1 in patients with recent cancer were linked with higher risk of stroke/thromboembolism at 2 years than in patients without recent cancer.526 This concept should be considered in defining the risk/benefit ratio of anticoagulation in individual patients with cancer. Therefore, the decision for anticoagulation in patients with an active malignancy should take into account the enhanced thrombotic and/or bleeding risk and other risk prediction scores used for general AF populations.509 For bleeding risk assessment, the HAS-BLED (Hypertension, Abnormal renal and liver function, Stroke, Bleeding Labile international normalized ratio, Elderly, Drugs or alcohol) score may be considered. A proposed approach to anticoagulation therapy in cancer, based on the acronym T (thrombotic risk), B (bleeding risk), I (interactions among drugs), P (patient access and preferences), is outlined in Figure 31.519,527 Long-term anticoagulation is recommended in adult patients with CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥2 in men or ≥3 in women and must be considered also when the score is 1 in men and 2 in women.273 The clinical pattern of AF (i.e. first detected, paroxysmal, persistent, long-standing persistent, permanent, post-operative) should not influence the indication of thromboprophylaxis.273 The same approach can be proposed for patients with cancer and AF, also considering that the CHA2DS2-VASc score likely underestimates their thromboembolic risk.530 In the specific setting of cancer, decision-making on long-term oral anticoagulation should also consider the cancerrelated type, stage, prognosis and the potentially changing thromboembolic or bleeding risk.508,509 The use of vitamin K antagonists (VKA) in cancer is limited by their drawbacks in this setting; however, they remain the only indicated anticoagulants in patients with moderate to severe mitral stenosis or a mechanical prosthetic valve. LMWH constitute a viable short-term anticoagulation option, particularly in hospitalized patients with a recent cancer diagnosis, advanced cancer disease, or during some cancer treatments (e.g.

In patients with cancer developing new VHD during cancer therapy, management according to the 2021 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of VHD507 is recommended, taking into consideration cancer prognosis and patient comorbidities. I C © ESC 2022

EACTS, European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery; ESC, European Society of Cardiology; VHD, valvular heart disease. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence.

Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy or with recent active bleeding). However, LMWH efficacy for stroke or systemic embolism prevention in AF has not been established and their use is only based on their proven efficacy and safety in VTE. The use of a NOAC for AF has not been evaluated in a dedicated RCT in patients with cancer. However, secondary analyses of seminal NOAC trials using direct factor Xa inhibitors (ROCKET AF [Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation], ARISTOTLE [Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation], ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 [Effective Anticoagulation with Factor Xa Next Generation in Atrial Fibrillation–Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 48]) and observational data suggest better safety and at least similar effectiveness of the NOAC when compared with VKA in patients with AF and active cancer.531–538 NOAC use in cancer is limited by drug–drug interactions,508 severe renal dysfunction, increased risk of bleeding in patients with unoperated or residual GI or genitourinary (GU) malignancies, or impaired GI absorption.

Left atrial appendage (LAA) occluder devices are used in very selected patients with cancer in clinical practice. The potential

Pathophysiology of AF associated with cancer

AF in cancer

Ageing

CV and metabolic

comorbiditiesb Anticancer treatmentsa

Cancer invasion

Cancer surgery Inflammation Hypoxia ANS imbalance Paraneoplastic manifestations

Figure 30 Pathophysiology of atrial fibrillation associated with cancer. AF, atrial fibrillation; ANS, autonomic nervous system; CV, cardiovascular; DM, diabetes mellitus; HF, heart failure; IHD, ischaemic heart disease; VHD, valvular heart disease. aSupplementary data, Table S18. bObesity, hypertension, DM, CVDs (HF, VHD, IHD, cardiomyopathies, cardiac amyloidosis), thyroid diseases, obstructive sleep apnoea, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease, autonomic dysfunction, alcohol consumption, genetic predisposition. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

Thrombocytopaenia GI/GU cancer, GI comorbidities, or GI toxicity Recent or evolving intracranial lesions Active bleeding or recent major bleeding Severe renal dysfunction (eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m 2) Bleeding risk scores (e.g., HAS-BLED)

Assess Bleeding risk:

Cancer-related risk (cancer type and stage, cancer treatment) CHA2DS2-VASc score for risk stratification (Class IIa) a

Assess Thromboembolic risk:

Anticancer agents Supportive therapies

Assess drug-drug Interactions (P-glycoprotein, CYP3A4):

Assess Patient preferences and drug availability

T

B

I

P

Thromboembolic and bleeding risk reassessment

(Class I) Very high bleeding riskb

Type of anticoagulant

treatment LAA oclusionc

(Class IIb)

LMWH (Class IIa)

Moderate/severe mitral stenosis or mechanical prosthetic valve

Patients suitable

for NOACd

N

N Structured approach to anticoagulation for AF in patients with cancer

No anticoagulation

Y

VKA (Class IIa)

Y

NOAC (Class IIa)

Y Long-term anticoagulation according to CHA2DS2-VASc score

≥2 (men) or ≥3 (women) (Class I) 1 (men) or 2 (women) (Class IIa) 0 (men) or 1 (women) (Class IIb)

N

Figure 31 Structured approach to anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation in patients with cancer. AF, atrial fibrillation; CHA2DS2-VASc, Congestive heart failure, Hypertension, Age ≥75 years (2 points), Diabetes mellitus, Stroke (2 points)—Vascular disease, Age 65–74 years, Sex category (female); CrCl, creatinine clearance; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; GI, gastrointestinal; GU, genitourinary; HAS-BLED, Hypertension, Abnormal renal and liver function, Stroke, Bleeding Labile international normalized ratio, Elderly, Drugs or alcohol; LA, left atrial; LAA, left atrial appendage; LMWH, low-molecular-weight heparins; N, no; NOAC, non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant; VKA, vitamin K antagonists; Y, yes. aIn selected patients, cardiac imaging parameters related to increased thromboembolic risk should be considered (LAA thrombus, severely dilated left atrium, severely impaired LA strain528). bVery high bleeding risk: active or recent major bleeding (,1 month previously); recent/evolving intracranial lesions; platelet count ,25 000/μL. According to the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis,529 major bleeding is defined as a fall in haemoglobin level ≥2 g/dL and/or transfusion of ≥2 units of red blood cells and/or fatal bleeding and/or bleeding in a critical area (intracranial, intraspinal, intraocular, pericardial, intra-articular, intramuscular with compartment syndrome, or retroperitoneal). cPercutaneous left appendage closure may be considered in patients with a life expectancy of .1 year who are at high thromboembolic and bleeding risk and in whom anticoagulation is contraindicated. dConditions favouring LMWH: unoperated GI/GU cancer; GI comorbidities or toxicity; severe renal dysfunction (CrCl , 15 mL/min); NOAC major drug–drug interactions, platelet count ,50 000/μL. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

complications related to the implant—including device-related thrombosis—and the lack of prospective data in the setting of patients with cancer have to be taken into consideration for this option. In a recent retrospective analysis of patients referred to LAA occlusion the risk of in-hospital ischaemic stroke/transient ischaemic attack was higher in patients with active cancer than in those with no cancer or prior history of cancer. The rate of in-hospital composite outcome (in-hospital death, ischaemic stroke/transient ischaemic attack, systemic embolism, bleeding requiring blood transfusion, pericardial effusion/cardiac tamponade treated with pericardiocentesis or surgically, and removal of embolized device) and 30-day/180-day readmission outcomes were not significantly different between the groups.539 The onset of AF may be related to transient factors, such as the peri-operative period or the effect of drugs known to facilitate AF onset. The traditional assumption that in these cases, AF may occur as an isolated event without recurrence may not be valid as the occurrence of AF may often be related to a pre-existing atrial substrate with vulnerability to AF.540 Post-operative AF has been associated with a four- to five-fold risk of AF recurrence in the following 5 years, along with a comparable long-term thromboembolic risk with AF not related to surgery.273,540,541 Anticoagulation therapy yielded a similarly lower risk of thromboembolic events and all-cause death in both groups.541 In the absence of direct evidence, anticoagulation to prevent thromboembolic events should be considered in patients at risk for stroke with AF after cancer surgery considering the anticipated net clinical benefit and informed patient preferences.273 Similarly, in patients with AF apparently related to transient factors —such as chemotherapy, other drugs, or electrolyte disturbances —a careful clinical assessment of the propensity to further develop AF is recommended, with need to revisit the risk/benefit ratio of long-term prescription of anticoagulation after a period of 3 months. In patients with cancer and newly detected or recurrence of AF, decision making on anticancer treatment requires a cardio-oncology MDT management,5 taking into account that neither the presence nor the risk of AF constitutes contraindications to anticancer treatment.508,517

Recommendation Table 31 — Recommendations for the management of atrial fibrillation in patients receiving anticancer treatment

Recommendations Classa Levelb CHA2DS2-VASc score should be considered for risk stratification for stroke/systemic thromboembolism taking into account that it may underestimate the actual thromboembolic risk.519,526 IIa C Long-term anticoagulation is recommended for stroke/systemic thromboembolism prevention in patients with cancer with AF and a CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥2 (men) or ≥3 (women) as per the 2020 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation.273 I C

Continued Long-term anticoagulation should be considered for stroke/systemic thromboembolism prevention in patients with cancer with AF and a CHA2DS2-VASc score = 1 (men) or = 2 (women) as per the 2020 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation.273 IIa C

Patients with cancer,c AF, and CHA2DS2-VASc score 0 (men) or 1 (women) may have a higher thrombotic risk than patients without cancer and may be considered for therapeutic anticoagulation after consideration of the bleeding risk.526 IIb C Thromboembolic and bleeding risk reassessment is recommended during follow-up in patients with cancer with AF.d,273 I C NOAC should be considered for stroke prevention in preference to LMWH and VKA (excluding patients with mechanical heart valves or moderate-to-severe mitral stenosis) in patients without a high bleeding risk, significant drug–drug interactions, or severe renal dysfunction.531–537 IIa B LMWH should be considered in patients with active cancere and AF who are not suitable for NOACf.525 IIa C LAA occlusion may be considered for stroke prevention in patients with cancer with AF and contraindications for long-term anticoagulation with a life expectancy .12 months.273,539 IIb C Antiplatelet therapy or prophylactic LMWH are not recommended for stroke or systemic thromboembolism prevention in AF with cancer.273 III C Heart rate control strategy, preferably with beta-blockers, should be considered in patients who develop well-tolerated AF while they are receiving active cancer treatmentg. IIa C © ESC 2022

5-FU, 5-fluorouracil; AF, atrial fibrillation; BMI, body mass index; CHA2DS2-VASc, Congestive heart failure, Hypertension, Age .75 years (2 points), Diabetes mellitus, Stroke (2 points)—Vascular disease, Age 65–74 years, Sex category (female); CrCl, creatinine clearance; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; ESC, European Society of Cardiology; HF, heart failure; LAA, left atrial appendage; LMWH, low-molecular-weight heparins; LV, left ventricular; MM, multiple myeloma; NOAC, non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants; VKA, vitamin K antagonists. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cFactors that may increase thromboembolic risk in patients with cancer including comorbidities (proteinuria . 150 mg/24 h, eGFR, 45 mL/min/1.73 m2, BMI ≥30 kg/m2, thrombophilia), cancer type (pancreatic, gastric, ovarian, brain, lung, MM), cancer stage (metastatic disease) anticancer therapies: alkylating agents, aflibercept, bevacizumab, anthracyclines, capecitabine, 5-FU, gemcitabine, methotrexate, EGFR inhibitors, bleomycin, axitinib, lenvatinib, pazopanib, sorafenib, sunitinib, carfilzomib, irinotecan, taxanes, tasonermin, tretinoin. dStroke and bleeding risk may change during both cancer treatment and the course of the underlying disease; reassessment is important to inform treatment decisions and address potentially modifiable bleeding risk factors. ePatients receiving cancer treatment, patients diagnosed with cancer in the past 6 months, and patients with progressive or advanced disease. fHigh bleeding risk, severe renal dysfunction (CrCl, 15 mL/min); NOAC major drug–drug interactions. gAsymptomatic or mild symptomatic patients without HF signs or symptoms or deterioration of LV function. The optimal heart rate target in AF patients is unclear. A resting heart rate ,110 bpm (i.e. lenient rate control) should be considered as the initial heart rate target for rate control therapy. A review of rate vs. rhythm strategy should be made at the end of cancer treatment.273 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

6.4.2 Long corrected QT interval and ventricular

arrhythmias VA are not common during cancer, although their incidence increases in patients with advanced cancer and CV comorbidities.49,259,516,542 Mechanisms proposed to explain cancer therapy-induced VA include: (1) direct effects of cancer drugs on the activity/expression of ionic channels that regulate the ventricular action potential,4,369,442,516,542,543 and (2) a permanent arrhythmogenic substrate created by cancer and systemic inflammation caused by cancer, pre-existing CV comorbidities, and/or a new CTR-CVT.4,9,259,369,442,516,542,543 Treatment of cancer therapy-induced VA should follow general clinical guidelines.22,442,544 In patients with asymptomatic selfterminating VA, drug discontinuation is not required unless they have additional CVRF or persistent ECG abnormalities.270 Symptomatic VA require cancer drug dose reduction or discontinuation and patients should be referred to the cardiologist for evaluation and treatment.4,442 Recurrent symptomatic life-threatening VA require urgent intervention.4,270,442,544 The administration of class IA, IC, and III antiarrhythmic drugs is limited by the risk of drug–drug interactions and QTc prolongation. Beta-blockers and class IB drugs are less likely to cause drug interactions or QTc prolongation. Beta-blockers are the preferred choice if the cancer drug is also associated with CTRCD. Amiodarone is the antiarrhythmic drug of choice in patients with structural heart disease and haemodynamic instability.

Table 8 Risk factors for drug-induced QT prolongation and torsade de pointes

Correctable Non-correctable QT-prolonging drugsa • Antiarrhythmics • Antibiotics • Antidepressants • Antifungals • Antiemetics • Antihistamines • Antipsychotics • Loop diuretics • Opioids (methadone) Bradyarrhythmia Electrolyte imbalance/ abnormalities • Hypokalaemia (≤3.5 mEq/L) • Hypomagnesaemia (≤1.6 mEq/L) • Hypocalcaemia (≤8.5 mEq/L) Inadequate dose adjustment of renal or hepatic cleared QT-prolonging drugs Acute myocardial ischaemia

Age . 65 years Baseline QTc interval prolongationb Family history of sudden death (congenital LQTS or genetic polymorphism) Female sex Impaired renal function (for renally excreted drugs) Liver disease (for hepatically excreted drugs) Personal history of syncope or drug-induced TdP Pre-existing CVD (CAD, HF, LV hypertrophy)

© ESC 2022

CAD, coronary artery disease; CVD, cardiovascular disease; HF, heart failure; LQTS, long QT syndrome; LV, left ventricular; QTc, corrected QT interval; TdP, torsade de pointes. aSee https://www.crediblemeds.org. bQTc using Fridericia correction (QTcF = QT/3√RR) is recommended in patients with cancer. Table 9 Classification of corrected QT interval prolongation induced by cancer drug therapy

Classification Drugs

High risk: QTcF prolongation ≥10 ms and risk of TdP • Aclarubicin • Arsenic trioxide • Glasdegib • Nilotinib • Oxaliplatin • Pazopanib • Ribociclib • Sunitinib • Toremifene • Vandetanib Moderate risk: QTcF prolongation ≥10 ms and low or no risk of TdP (or uncertain) • Abarelix • Belinostat • Brigantinib • Carbozantinib • Ceritinib • Crizotinib • Dovitinib • Entrectinib • Eribulin • Gilteritinib • Ivosidenib • Lapatinib • Lenvatinib • Osimertinib • Panobinostat • Rucaparib • Selpercatinib • Sorafenib • Tipiracil/ trifluridine • Vemurafenib Low risk: QTcF prolongation , 10 msa • ADT • Afatinib • Axitinib • Binimetinib • Bortezomib • Bosutinib • Carfilzomib • Dabrafenib • Dasatinib • Encorafenib • Midostaurin • Pertuzumab • Ponatinib • Romidepsin • Quizartinib • Tamoxifen • Vorinostat © ESC 2022

ADT, androgen deprivation therapy; QTcF, corrected QT interval using Fridericia correction; TdP, torsade de pointes. aADT may prolong the QTc interval (GnRH agonist, GnRH antagonist, bicalutamide, flutamide, apalutamide, darolutamide, enzalutamide, and abiraterone) (see Figure 21). Developed from EMA prescribing information,252 FDA prescribing information,253 and AZCERT.547 Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

Decisions on the use of antiarrhythmic drugs or device therapy (cardioverter defibrillators, catheter ablation) should consider life expectancy, quality of life, and complication risks.349 Most cancer therapy-induced VA are related to a prolongation of QTc leading to the development of TdP.259,516,542 Risk factors for QTc prolongation and TdP are summarized in Table 8.4,22,45,48,516,543 The upper 99% limits of normal for QTc values in the general population are 450 ms for men and 460 ms for women.545 Although there is no threshold of QTc prolongation at which TdP can occur, a QTc ≥500 ms is associated with a two- to three-fold higher risk for TdP, while TdP rarely occurs when QTc is ,500 ms.442 Although the incidence of QTc prolongation ≥500 ms and TdP is low during cancer therapy, QTc prolongation to levels that require closer monitoring (QTc ≥480 ms) is more common (Table 9).4,9,22,45,48,49,259,369,516,543,546 Changes in the QT interval of .60 ms from baseline should not routinely affect treatment decisions if the QTc remains ,500 ms.1 Cardiology consultation is advised in patients with an abnormal baseline QTc interval, patients treated with drugs that prolong the QT interval, those who develop new cardiac symptoms (syncope or pre-syncope, rapid palpitations or QTc prolongation with new-onset bradycardia, high degree of heart block), and/or those with known inherited arrhythmia

QTcF value

QTcF value

QTcF value

QTcF monitoring according to drugspecific protocol

ECG after any dose increase of QTc-

prolonging drug

(class I)

If QTcF <500 ms Continue treatment at same or

reduced dose according to

drug-specific protocol

(Class I) Consider alternative

treatment Alternative

treatment

(Class I) (Class I) (Class I) QTcF value

Resume treatment at the same

or reduced dose according to drug-specific protocol Consider restarting treatment

at reduced dose

(Class IIb) MDT to discuss alternative

cancer treatments

(Class I)

≤480 ms

≤480 ms

≤480 ms >480 ms

>480 ms and

<500 ms

>480 ms and

<500 ms >480 ms and

<500 ms ≥500 ms

≥500 ms ≥500 ms TdP or sustainedVA

Correct baseline risk factors for QTc prolongationb Avoid/stop concomitant QTc prolonging drugsb Ensure K+ >4.0 mmol/L, Mg2+ >2.0 mg/dL (>1.10 mmol/L) and normal values of corrected Ca2+

Baseline 12-lead ECG: QTcF

Start therapy ECG monitoringc Cardio-oncology evaluation Correct reversible causesb

Correct reversible causesb Weekly ECG monitoring Drug interruption Correct reversible causesb

Drug withhold Correct reversible causesb

QTc monitoring before and duringtreatment withQTc prolonginganticancerdrugsa

Figure 32 Corrected QT interval monitoring before and during treatment with corrected QT interval-prolonging anticancer drugs. Ca2+ , calcium; ECG, electrocardiogram; K+, potassium; MDT, multidisciplinary team; Mg2+, magnesium; QTc, corrected QT interval; QTcF, corrected QT interval using Fridericia correction; TdP, Torsade de pointes; VA, ventricular arrhythmias. QT interval using Fridericia correction (QTcF = QT/3√RR) is recommended in patients with cancer. Upper 99% limits of normal for QTc values in the general population are 450 ms for men and 460 ms for women.369 aTable 9. bTable 8 and https://www.crediblemeds.org. cECG monitoring at baseline, once steady-state anticancer drug levels have been achieved, after each dose modification, or any treatment interruption .2 weeks; monthly for the first 3 months, and then periodically during treatment depending on patient-specific risk factors and cancer treatment. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

disorders.4,45,48,442,544 The challenges for the cardio-oncology teams are to identify patients more susceptible to developing VA, determine whether a VA is directly due to CTR-CVT, individualize the treatment strategy, and optimize clinical monitoring during treatment. Figure 32 shows the algorithm for the management of QTc prolongation during cancer therapy. In patients with cancer, the Fridericia formula is recommended and has demonstrated less error than other correction methods such as Bazzett at both high and low heart rates.44 In patients treated with QTc-prolonging drugs, serum electrolytes and other risk factors should be closely monitored and corrected, and concomitant QT-prolonging drugs avoided if possible.4,22,45,369,543 For selected cancer drugs, there are specific manufacturer recommendations for ECG monitoring during treatment, dosage adjustments, or discontinuation of therapy in case of QTc prolongation.548 Although there are no recommendations, patients with cancer with QTc prolongation associated with severe bradycardia or sinus pauses may benefit from isoprenaline infusion or temporary pacing. Despite present restrictions, the improved prognosis for many malignancies is increasing the number of patients with cancer who are candidates for an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD), particularly when life expectancy is .1 year (including patients who experienced resuscitated sudden cardiac death or severe VA from a QTc-prolonging drug with no alternative treatment available). 6.4.3 Bradyarrhythmias

AV conduction disease can be caused by ICI in the presence or absence of myocarditis. If the PR interval increases (new first-degree heart block) in patients treated with ICI, serial ECG monitoring is recommended, and if PR prolongation to .300 ms develops, the patient should be hospitalized under close ECG monitoring and i.v. methylprednisolone is recommended.550 IMiD (thalidomide, pomalidomide)285 and ALK inhibitors (crizotinib, alectinib, brigatinib, or ceritinib)551 are associated with sinus bradycardia. Holter ECG monitoring is recommended to exclude significant sinus pauses in symptomatic patients. In asymptomatic patients with normal LV function, sinus bradycardia is usually well tolerated and treatment can continue. If patients are symptomatic (syncope, pre-syncope of reduced exercise tolerance from chronotropic incompetence) then a trial of cancer drug withdrawal to confirm causation with the symptoms is recommended. A MDT discussion is needed to analyse risks/benefits of alternative cancer therapies vs. restarting the culprit cancer therapy at a lower dose with heart rate monitoring. In selected cases, when no cancer treatment alternative is available, pacing is indicated.

6.5 Arterial hypertension

Arterial hypertension in patients with cancer may be caused by their cancer treatments (e.g. VEGFi, second- and third-generation BCR-ABL TKI, brigatinib, ibrutinib, fluoropyrimidines, cisplatin, abiraterone, bicalutamide, enzalutamide), non-cancer drugs (e.g. corticosteroids, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs), and other factors including stress, pain, excessive alcohol consumption, renal impairment, untreated sleep apnoea, obesity, and reduced exercise.552 In all patients with cancer with new hypertension assessment, correction of these other factors is important before considering interruption of a cancer treatment. Untreated hypertension344 is a confirmed risk factor of HF during treatment with anthracyclines,553 ibrutinib,264 and VEGFi.554 Given that many of the cancer therapies that cause hypertension also cause

Recommendation Table 32 — Recommendations for the management of long corrected QT interval and ventricular arrhythmias in patients receiving anticancer treatment

Recommendations Classa Levelb

How to manage QTc prolongation in patients with cancer Discontinuation of QTc-prolonging cancer therapy is recommended in patients who develop TdP or sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias during treatment.549 I C Temporary interruption of QTc-prolonging cancer therapy is recommended in patients who develop asymptomatic QTcF ≥500 ms and an ECG should be repeated every 24 h until resolution of the QTcF prolongation.549 I C Immediate withdrawal of any offending drug and correction of electrolyte abnormalities and other risk factorsc is recommended in patients with cancer who develop QTcF ≥500 ms.349,442,546 I C Weekly ECG monitoring is recommended in asymptomatic patients with cancer with QTcF 480–500 ms who are treated with a QTc-prolonging cancer therapy.349,442,546 I C A 12-lead ECG is recommended after any dose increase of QTc-prolonging cancer therapy.270,442,544 I C

Continued Restarting QTc-prolonging cancer therapy

A multidisciplinary discussion is recommended before restarting QTc-prolonging drugs in patients who have developed significant QTcF prolongation, to discuss alternative cancer treatments.4,22,259,349,442,546 I C In patients who experienced significant QTcF prolongation, restarting the culprit QTc-prolonging cancer treatment may be considered, ideally at a reduced dose according to each drug recommendation.45,259,349,442,546,549 IIb C Weekly ECG monitoring during the first 4–6 weeks and then monthly thereafter is recommended in patients with cancer after restarting QTc-prolonging cancer therapy.549 I C © ESC 2022

ECG, electrocardiogram; QTc, corrected QT interval; QTcF, corrected QT interval using Fridericia correction; TdP, torsade de pointes. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cSee https://www.crediblemeds.org and Table 8. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

CTRCD, treatment of hypertension with ACE-I or ARB as first-line therapy is recommended to reduce the risk of CTRCD. Combination therapy with an ACE-I or ARB and a dihydropyridine CCB is recommended in patients with cancer with systolic BP ≥ 160 mmHg and diastolic BP ≥100 mmHg due to the more rapid onset of BP control with the combination compared with ACE-I/ARB monotherapy (Figures 33 and 34). If severe hypertension is diagnosed (systolic BP ≥180 mmHg or diastolic BP ≥110 mmHg), the competing cancer and CV risks should be evaluated by a MDT, and any cancer therapy associated with hypertension should be deferred or temporarily withheld until the BP is controlled to values ,160 mmHg (systolic BP) and ,100 mmHg (diastolic BP). Culprit cancer therapy can be restarted once BP is controlled, with consideration for dose reduction. In patients with resistant cancer therapy-related hypertension, spironolactone, oral or transdermal nitrates, and/or hydralazine should be considered. In patients with cancer with evidence of high sympathetic tone, stress, and/or pain, beta-blockers including carvedilol or nebivolol should be considered. Diuretics, preferably spironolactone, may be considered in patients with cancer with hypertension and evidence of increased fluid retention, with monitoring of BP, electrolytes, and renal function.

The decisions to initiate BP treatment and BP targets during the management of cancer-drug induced hypertension depend upon the context of the cancer and prognosis (Figure 34). CS should be treated according to the 2018 ESC/European Society of Hypertension (ESH) Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension.138

Recommended threshold for asymptomatic hypertension treatment

in differentclinicalscenarios

CS Home BP mmHg Curable cancer during treatment Metastatic cancer Prognosis >3 years Metastatic cancer Prognosis 1–3 years Metastatic cancer Prognosis <1 year

160+ Treat Treat Treat Treat Treat

140–159 Treat Treat Treat Consider treatment May treat

135–139 Treat May treat Consider treatment May treat None

130–134 May treat None None None None

<130 None None None None None

Class 1 Class 1Ia Class 1Ib

Figure 33 Recommended threshold for asymptomatic hypertension treatment in different clinical scenarios. BP, blood pressure; CS, cancer survivors. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

BP target during cancer ther a p y

p

Systolic BP ≥ 160 mmHg and diastolic BP ≥ 100 mmHg

Hype r tension caused b y cancer ther a p y

p

A CE-I or ARB

(Class I) A CE-I or ARB

(Class I)

Di h yd r o p yridine CCB

p p as second-line ther a p y

p p

in patients with uncont r olled BP

(Class I)

Di h yd r o p yridine CCB

p p (Class I) BP target <140 mmHg systolic and

<90 mmHg diastolic

(Class I)

BP target <130 mmHg systolic and <80 mmHg

diastolic if w ell tolerated

(Class IIb)

Beta-bloc k ers

k k b Spi r onolactone Oral or transdermal nitrates and/or h ydralazine

(Class IIa)

If r esistant hypertension a : In selected asymptomatic patients with

metastatic cancer systolic BP 140–160 mmHg,

and diastolic BP 90–100 mmHg

(Class IIb)

N

T r

T

T eatment of a r terial h ype r tension in patients with cancer

Y

OR

AND

OR

Figure 34 Treatment of arterial hypertension in patients with cancer. AF, atrial fibrillation; ACE-I, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors; ARB, angiotensin receptor blockers; BP, blood pressure; CCB, calcium channel blockers; HF, heart failure; MI, myocardial infarction; N, no; VEGFi, vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors; Y, yes. aResistant hypertension is defined as BP being uncontrolled despite treatment with optimal or best-tolerated doses of three or more drugs including a diuretic, and confirmed by ambulatory and home BP monitoring. bConsider beta-blockers (nebivolol or carvedilol are preferred in patients on VEGFi) at any treatment step, when there is a specific indication for their use, e.g. HF, angina, post-MI, or AF.

Recommendation Table 33 — Recommendations for the management of arterial hypertension in patients receiving anticancer treatment

Recommendations Classa Levelb

General Effective treatment of cancer therapy-induced arterial hypertension to prevent cancer treatment interruption and CV complications is recommended. I C A BP target ,140 mmHg systolic and ,90 mmHg diastolic is recommended during cancer therapy. I C A BP target ,130 mmHg systolic and ,80 mmHg diastolic may be considered during cancer therapy provided that the treatment is well tolerated. IIb C In selected asymptomatic patients with metastatic cancer, a systolic BP 140–160 mmHg and diastolic BP 90–100 mmHg treatment threshold may be considered provided there is ongoing BP monitoring. IIb C The competing cancer and CV risk evaluation is recommended if the systolic BP is ≥180 mmHg or diastolic BP ≥110 mmHg, and any cancer therapy associated with hypertension should be deferred or temporarily withheld until the BP is controlled to values ,160 mmHg (systolic) and ,100 mmHg (diastolic). I C

Continued Cancer therapy-induced arterial hypertension treatment

ACE-I or ARB are the first-line antihypertensive drugsc recommended for BP management in patients with cancer.555–557 I B Dihydropyridine CCB are recommended as second-line antihypertensive drugs for patients with cancer with uncontrolled BP. I C Combination therapy with ACE-I or ARB and dihydropyridine CCB is recommended in patients with cancer with systolic BP ≥160 mmHg and diastolic BP ≥100 mmHg. I C Diltiazem and verapamil are not recommended to treat arterial hypertension in patients with cancer due to their drug–drug interactions.d III C © ESC 2022

ACE-I, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors; ARB, angiotensin receptor blockers; BP, blood pressure; CCB, calcium channel blockers; CV, cardiovascular. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cUnless contraindicated. dIn selected patients with cancer, who are intolerant to multiple other antihypertensive drugs, diltiazem and verapamil may be considered with close monitoring of drug–drug interactions. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

6.6 Thrombosis and thromboembolic

events Thromboembolic events that develop during cancer and its treatment encompass both VTE and arterial thromboembolism (ATE) and are collectively referred to as cancer-associated thrombosis. Cancer-associated thrombosis is determined by the prothrombotic milieu induced by cancer, the prothrombotic properties of certain anticancer and adjunctive therapies, and patient-related risk factors, including demographics, genetic predisposition, and comorbidities.513

6.6.1 Venous thromboembolism

VTE, including deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and PE, is the second-leading cause of death in patients with malignancies.558 Cancer confers a five-fold higher risk of VTE and cancer-associated VTE represents 30% of all VTE cases.559,560 The risk of VTE varies in the course of cancer, with the highest risk occurring in the period following cancer diagnosis, during hospitalization and chemotherapy, and upon development of metastatic disease.561,562 Unprovoked VTE may be the first clinical sign of a malignancy, followed by a 5% incidence of cancer diagnosis during the subsequent 12 months.563

The risk factors for VTE in cancer are summarized in Figure 35.564,565 Patients with symptoms or signs suggestive of VTE, such as unilateral lower limb oedema or unexplained dyspnoea, should be screened with lower-extremity venous ultrasonography or contrast-enhanced CT for DVT and CT pulmonary angiography for PE, according to the 2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism recommendations566

Risk factors for VTE in patients with cancer

Patient-related factors

Ageing Comorbiditiesa

Sex (female) Hereditary coagulation defectsb

Performance status Prior VTE history

Treatment-related factors

Cancer therapyc

Central venous catheters Hospitalization Major surgery

Cancer-related factors

Cancer type Genetic characteristics (JAK2 or K-ras mutations) Histology (adenocarcinoma) Initial period after diagnosis Primary site (pancreas, stomach, ovaries, brain, lung, myeloma) Stage (advanced, metastatic)

Figure 35 Risk factors for venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer. ATE, arterial thromboembolism; BMI, body mass index; CrCl, creatinine clearance; IMiD, immunomodulatory drugs; PI, proteasome inhibitors; VTE, venous thromboembolism. aAcute infection, chronic kidney disease (CrCl , 45 mL/min), pulmonary disease, obesity (BMI ≥30 kg/m2), ATE. bFactor V Leiden, prothrombin gene mutation. cChemotherapy (carboplatin, cyclophosphamide, anthracyclines, antimetabolites, irinotecan, taxanes, tasonermin), anti-angiogenic agents (bevacizumab, axitinib, lenvatinib, pazopanib, sorafenib, sunitinib), IMiD (thalidomide, lenalidomide), PI (carfilzomib), hormonal therapy, erythropoiesis-stimulating agents. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

and the second consensus document on diagnosis and management of acute deep vein thrombosis.567

6.6.2 Arterial thromboembolism

Cancer carries a two-fold higher risk of ATE, including MI and ischaemic stroke.568 ATE risk is higher in men, with advanced age, and in patients with lung or kidney cancer. Pathologies related to ATE in cancer include ischaemic stroke induced by AF or RT-induced carotid artery disease, embolization by tumour cells or non-bacterial thrombotic endocarditis, disseminated intravascular coagulationrelated peripheral microcirculatory thromboembolism, paradoxical cerebral embolism in the course of VTE, and cerebral sinus thrombosis.569 6.6.3 Intracardiac thrombosis

Intracardiac thrombus in patients with malignancies may result from the prothrombotic properties of cancer and its treatment and the use of central venous catheters. Thrombus is the most common intracardiac mass and it can occur within any cardiac chamber. Right atrial thrombi are often related to a venous catheter where the line has inappropriately advanced into the right atrium. Intraventricular thrombi usually occur in the setting of CTRCD. LAA thrombi are most commonly associated with AF, which may also be related to cancer or its therapy. Patients with systemic embolization should be screened for cardiac origin of thrombus initially with TTE and/or transoesophageal echocardiography.528 CMR is more sensitive and specific than TTE

Thrombocytopaenia GI/GU cancer, GI comorbidities, or GI toxicity Recent or evolving intracranial lesions Active bleeding or recent major bleeding Severe renal dysfunction (eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m2)

Assess Bleeding risk:

Patient-related factors Cancer-related factors Treatment-related factors

Assess Thromboembolic risk:

Anticancer agents Supportive therapies

Assess drug-drug Interactions (P-glycoprotein, CYP3A4):

Assess Patient preferences

T

B

I

P

Thromboembolic and bleeding risk reassessment

(Class I)

Very high bleeding riska

Conditions favouring LMWH over NOACb

NOAC or LMWH

(Class I)

LMWH (Class I)

No anticoagulation

Patient’s preference

N

N

Structured approach to anticoagulation forVTE in patients with cancer

Y

Y

Figure 36 Structured approach to anticoagulation for venous thromboembolism in patients with active cancer. CrCl, creatinine clearance; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; GI, gastrointestinal; GU, genitourinary; LMWH, low-molecular-weight heparins; N, no; NOAC, non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants; VTE, venous thromboembolism; Y, yes. aVery high bleeding risk: active or recent major bleeding (,1 month); recent/ evolving intracranial lesions; platelet count ,25 000/μL. According to the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis,529 major bleeding is defined as: fall in haemoglobin level ≥2 g/dL, transfusion of ≥2 units of red blood cells, fatal bleeding, or bleeding in a critical area (intracranial, intraspinal, intraocular, pericardial, intra-articular, intramuscular with compartment syndrome, or retroperitoneal). bConditions favouring LMWH: unoperated GI/GU cancer; GI comorbidities or toxicity; severe renal dysfunction (CrCl , 15 mL/min); NOAC major drug–drug interactions, platelet count , 50 000/μL. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

for detecting intracardiac thrombi and late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) CMR with the long inversion time technique is currently considered the gold standard.570,571

6.6.4 Anticoagulation therapy

Patients with cancer frequently have both an increased thrombotic risk and an increased bleeding risk associated with certain cancer locations (e.g. GI, intracranial), thrombocytopaenia, and other coagulation defects (secondary to bone marrow invasion, cancer therapies, or cancer itself) and associated comorbidities (e.g. renal or hepatic dysfunction, GI toxicities). Several anticancer agents are further characterized by drug–drug interactions with anticoagulants. All these factors may render anticoagulation in cancer quite challenging. A proposed approach to anticoagulation therapy in cancer-associated venous thrombosis, based on the TBIP acronym (Thromboembolic risk, Bleeding risk, drug–drug Interactions, Patient preferences), is outlined in Figure 36.527

6.6.4.1 Treatment and secondary prevention of venous

thromboembolism Several large RCTs and meta-analyses have shown that LMWH decrease the risk of recurrent VTE by 40% compared to VKA, with a similar risk of major bleeding.572–576 However, VKA are characterized by an unpredictable anticoagulation effect and low time in therapeutic range in patients with malignancies due to multiple drug–drug interactions, GI toxicity, malnutrition, and liver dysfunction.577 NOAC have been assessed as potential alternatives to LMWH for cancer-associated VTE, based on RCTs that compared edoxaban, rivaroxaban or apixaban to dalteparin.578–583 The totality of evidence derived by these trials and subsequent meta-analyses584–586 shows that NOAC are non-inferior to dalteparin in reducing the risk of VTE recurrence. The risk of major bleeding was similar, although NOAC were associated with an increased risk of clinically relevant non-major bleeding, particularly in patients with luminal GI and GU malignancies.586 As a result, edoxaban, rivaroxaban, and apixaban are recommended for the treatment of VTE (DVT and PE) in patients with cancer without any of the following bleeding risk factors: unoperated GI or GU malignancies, history of recent bleeding or within 7 days of major surgery, significant thrombocytopaenia (platelet count, 50000/μL), severe renal dysfunction (creatinine clearance (CrCl, 15 mL/min), or GI comorbidities.582,586 In addition, drug–drug interactions between NOAC, cancer therapies, and other concomitant treatments should be checked.587 There are also concerns about NOAC in patients with GI toxicity such as vomiting or those having undergone gastrectomy or extensive intestine resection, as well as those with severely impaired renal function. Shared decision-making considering informed patient preferences should guide the choice of anticoagulation. Incidentally encountered proximal DVT or PE should be treated in the same manner as symptomatic VTE as they bear similar rates of recurrence and mortality.588 The minimal duration of anticoagulation is 6 months and extended anticoagulation is suggested in the presence of active malignancy, metastatic disease, or chemotherapy use. Cohort studies have shown that extended LMWH therapy beyond 6 and up to 12 months is safe in cancer-associated VTE.589,590 However, patients with cancer are also at high risk of bleeding during anticoagulant treatment and a periodic assessment of the risk/benefit ratio should performed. In VTE relapse under anticoagulation, the patient should be investigated for treatment adherence, cancer progression or relapse, while a different anticoagulation strategy should be endorsed (e.g. replacement of NOAC with LMWH). The management of patients with VTE and a platelet count ,25000/μL should be individualized by a MDT.299

The duration of anticoagulation in patients with catheterassociated thrombosis depends upon whether the catheter is removed or remains in situ. If removed, then anticoagulation should continue for a minimum of 3 months and until follow-up cardiac imaging confirms resolution of the thrombus. If the catheter remains in situ, then long-term therapeutic anticoagulation should continue.

6.6.4.2 Primary prevention of venous thromboembolism

Patients undergoing surgery and those who are hospitalized or in prolonged bed rest require thromboprophylaxis with low-dose anticoagulation.298,299,592–594 The ENOXACAN (Enoxaparin and

Recommendation Table 34 — Recommendations for the management of venous thromboembolism in patients receiving anticancer treatment

Recommendations Classa Levelb Apixaban, edoxaban, or rivaroxabanc are recommended for the treatment of symptomatic or incidental VTE in patients with cancer without contraindications.d,578–581,584,585 I A LMWH are recommended for the treatment of symptomatic or incidental VTE in patients with cancer with platelet count .50 000/μL.298,299,578– 581,584,585 I A

In patients with cancer with platelet counts of 25 000–50 000/μL, anticoagulation with half-dose LMWH may be considered after a multidisciplinary discussion.591 IIb C Prolongation of anticoagulation therapy beyond 6 months should be considered in selected patients with active cancere including metastatic disease.589,590 IIa A Catheter-associated VTE Duration of anticoagulation in patients with cancer with a catheter-associated VTE is recommended for a minimum of 3 months and continuing longer if the catheter remains in situ. I C © ESC 2022

CrCl, creatinine clearance; GI, gastrointestinal; GU, genitourinary; LMWH, low-molecular-weight heparins; ULN, upper limit of normal; VTE, venous thromboembolism. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cDrugs are listed in alphabetical order dHigh risk of GI or GU bleeding, GI absorption concerns, significant drug–drug interactions, severe renal dysfunction (CrCl , 15 mL/min), significant liver disease (alanine aminotransferase/aspartate aminotransferase . 2 × ULN), or significant thrombocytopaenia (platelet count , 50 000/μL). In addition, patients with primary brain tumours or brain metastases and acute leukaemia were excluded from the seminal apixaban trial.580 ePatients receiving cancer treatment, patients diagnosed with cancer in the past 6 months, and patients with progressive or advanced disease. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

Cancer) II study showed favourable outcomes with LMWH as primary thromboprophylaxis for 4 weeks after major abdominal or pelvic cancer surgery.595 For ambulatory patients, VTE risk should be individually determined and proposed scores such as the Khorana or the COMPASS-CAT (prospective COmparison of Methods for thromboembolic risk assessment with clinical Perceptions and AwareneSS in real-life patients—Cancer Associated Thrombosis) score may be useful.596,597 Further trials and a meta-analysis have shown that LMWH significantly reduced the incidence of symptomatic VTE in ambulatory patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy with acceptable safety.598–600 Two randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trials have assessed the role of NOAC in primary prevention of VTE in high-risk ambulatory patients receiving systemic cancer therapy (Khorana score ≥2).601,602 Over a follow-up period of 180 days, apixaban (2.5 mg twice a day)601 therapy resulted in a significantly lower rate of VTE, although the rate of major bleeding episodes was higher than with placebo. Rivaroxaban (10 mg once a day)602 treatment resulted in a non-significantly lower incidence of VTE or death due to VTE with low bleeding risk (no significant differences with placebo). Further data on the use of NOAC in this setting are warranted. Consideration of such therapy should be accompanied by a discussion with the patient about the relative benefits and harms, cancer prognosis, drug cost, and duration of prophylaxis. 6.7 Bleeding complications

Bleeding complications are more common in patients with cancer than in patients without cancer. This may be directly related to the tumour itself, or indirectly related to chemotherapyor RT-induced weakening of mucosal barriers.530

6.7.1 High-risk patients

GI and GU cancers are associated with a significant excess bleeding risk compared with other solid tumours.603 Thrombocytopaenia and platelet dysfunction due to haematological malignancies or bone marrow suppression can exacerbate bleeding. Other bleeding risk factors include advancing age, renal or hepatic impairment, metastatic disease, low body mass index, and treatment with ibrutinib, VEGFi, cetuximab, or bevacizumab.578,603–605 Gastric protection with routine proton pump inhibitor use should be considered in all patients with cancer on DAPT606,607 or anticoagulation.530

6.7.2 Antiplatelet therapy

Antiplatelet therapy, in particular DAPT, increases the risk of bleeding in patients with cancer.477 Following ACS and/or PCI, the risk of bleeding is approximately 1.6-fold greater in patients with cancer than in those without.477,605 The risk is greatest in those diagnosed with cancer in the preceding year, whereas more remote cancers carry lower excess risk.477 The PRECISE-DAPT (PREdicting bleeding Complications In patients undergoing Stent implantation and subsEquent Dual Anti Platelet Therapy) score appears not to perform well for predicting bleeding in patients with cancer.477 In order to reduce bleeding risk, the duration and intensity of DAPT should be minimized477,607 and triple therapy avoided whenever possible. At the same time, DAPT—if indicated—should not be withheld without good reason. A recent expert consensus statement suggests reduced platelet count thresholds for CV therapies, recommending aspirin initiation for platelet counts .10 000/μL and DAPT initiation (with aspirin and clopidogrel) for platelet counts .30 000/μL.608 In patients with platelet counts ,50 000/μL, clopidogrel is preferred over prasugrel or ticagrelor, and glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors should be avoided.608 To reduce peri-procedural bleeding, PCI should preferably be undertaken via the radial approach484 and prophylactic platelet transfusion may be considered for patients with platelet count ,20 000/μL.609

6.7.3 Management of bleeding

Basic principles of bleeding management should be followed with control of the bleeding source whenever possible. Platelet transfusions for significant thrombocytopaenia and withholding and reversal of anticoagulation for life-threatening bleeding may be needed as in the general population.530,610 Antifibrinolytic agents, such as tranexamic acid or e-aminocaproic acid, can be considered. Non-specific support of haemostasis using coagulation factor concentrates and specific reversal agents may be needed for patients on a NOAC with life-threatening bleeding.530 Recombinant activated factor VII or activated prothrombin complex concentrates should be avoided in patients with recent thrombosis.

Recommendation Table 35 — Recommendations for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis during anticancer treatment

Recommendation Classa Levelb

Extended prophylaxis with LMWH for 4 weeks post-operatively is recommended for patients with cancer undergoing major open or laparoscopic abdominal or pelvic surgery with low bleeding risk and high VTE risk.c,298,299,595 I B Prophylactic LMWH for the primary prevention of VTE is indicated in hospitalized patients with cancer or those with prolonged bedrest or reduced mobility in the absence of bleeding or other contraindications.298,299,592,594 I B For ambulatory patients with cancer at high risk of thrombosis receiving systemic therapy,d primary thromboprophylaxis with a NOAC (apixaban or rivaroxaban) or LMWH may be considered, provided there are no significant contraindications.e,298,593,594,601,602 IIb B A discussion with the patient about the relative benefits and harms, cancer prognosis, drug cost, and duration of treatment is recommended prior to prophylactic anticoagulation for the primary prevention of VTE. I C © ESC 2022

LMWH, low-molecular-weight heparins; NOAC, non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants; VTE, venous thromboembolism. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cReduced mobility, obesity, VTE history. dLocally advanced or metastatic pancreas or lung cancer or Khorana score ≥2. eRisk factors for bleeding, significant drug–drug interactions, or severe renal dysfunction. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

6.8 Peripheral artery disease

There is growing evidence that cancer therapy affects the vasculature. A recent meta-analysis showed a significantly increased arterial stiffness after anthracycline and non-anthracycline treatment.611 Paraneoplastic acral vascular syndrome was described after initiation of nivolumab, with first symptoms 3 weeks after initiation of therapy.612 Raynaud phenomenon has been associated with the use of bleomycin, cyclophosphamide, platinum compounds, vinca alkaloids, and fluoropyrimidines.491 Usual treatment of Raynaud’s includes non-pharmacological measures to help prevent an episode (avoidance of provoking factors such as cold temperature, vasoconstricting drugs) and a long-acting dihydropyridine CCB (amlodipine, modified-release nifedipine). Treatment with nilotinib or ponatinib may be associated with an increased risk of vascular adverse events, including arterial stiffness and PAD development.494 In a subgroup of patients, these events are severe or even life-threatening.613 Although the exact mechanisms remain unknown, we recommend screening for pre-existing PAD and for vascular risk factors such as DM in all patients before and during nilotinib or ponatinib therapy. Pooled data from three clinical trials showed arterial occlusive disease to be related to dose intensity in ponatinib-treated patients,614 but PAD was not addressed separately. If rapidly progressive PAD occurs with secondgeneration TKI, it may be advisable to switch to an alternative lowerrisk TKI (e.g. imatinib). Platelet aggregation inhibitors or anticoagulation and statins should be considered. Despite lack of evidence, all risk factors should be corrected.615

6.9 Pulmonary hypertension

All five groups of the PH classification can be observed in patients with cancer. Several cancer drugs can cause group 1 PH (pulmonary arterial hypertension [PAH]), including carfilzomib, bosutinib, dasatinib,616 ponatinib, interferon alpha, and alkylating agents (e.g. mitomycin C and cyclophosphamide, which mostly cause pulmonary veno-occlusive disease).617 PH associated with left heart disease (group 2) is related to drugs causing HF (e.g. anthracyclines). PH associated with lung disease (group 3) is related to drugs and therapies causing pulmonary fibrosis (e.g. bleomycin, thoracic radiation). The most common pulmonary vascular disease complicating cancer is VTE, which can cause chronic thromboembolic PH (group 4). Of note, central venous catheters are important causes of group 4 PH complicating cancer management. Other group 4 PH due to pulmonary artery obstructions includes angiosarcoma and other malignant tumours (e.g. renal carcinoma, uterine carcinoma, germ cell tumours of the testis).618

PH with unclear and/or multifactorial mechanisms (group 5) includes several conditions that may be complicated by complex and sometimes overlapping pulmonary vascular involvement. Tumoral PH includes pulmonary tumour micro-embolism and pulmonary tumour thrombotic microangiopathy.619 Multiple causes of PH have been described in patients with chronic myeloproliferative disorders. In chronic myelogenous leukaemia, spleen enlargement and anaemia can give rise to hyperkinetic syndrome. In polycythaemia vera and essential thrombocythemia, there is an increased risk of VTE and chronic thromboembolic PH. Moreover, formation of a blood clot within the hepatic veins can lead to Budd–Chiari syndrome and subsequent porto-PH. Pulmonary extramedullary haematopoiesis complicating idiopathic or secondary myelofibrosis may also contribute to dyspnoea and PH.620 Symptoms of PH are non-specific, such as shortness of breath and fatigue. In later stages, symptoms of right-sided HF may develop. An ECG should be performed and examined for RV hypertrophy, but a normal ECG does not exclude PH. Echocardiography is the first choice for assessing PH probability in patients who develop symptoms and/or signs suggestive of PH during cancer treatment. When peak tricuspid regurgitation velocity (TRV) is ≤2.8 m/s (equating to an estimated systolic PAP [sPAP] of ≤35 mmHg) and no other signs of PH are present, then the probability of PH is low. In the absence of a tricuspid regurgitant jet, other echocardiography signs may increase suspicion of PH (e.g. RV/LV basal diameter ratio . 1, RV outflow tract acceleration time , 105 ms, inferior vena cava diameter . 21 mm with decreased inspiratory collapse).620 Baseline TTE should be considered in patients receiving cancer drugs that can cause PH; however, a right-heart catheterization is required for definitive diagnosis of PH and to support PAH treatment decisions. In the DASISION (DASatinib vs. Imatinib Study In treatment-Naïve chronic myeloid leukemia patients) trial, 5% of patients randomized to dasatinib were diagnosed with PH, compared with 0.4% of those randomized to imatinib.621 In patients who develop PH, dasatinib treatment should be interrupted and an alternative TKI should be used.616 Overall management of PH in oncology patients should be based on the 2022 ESC/European Respiratory Society (ERS) Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary hypertension.620 Referral to a PH centre is recommended for multidisciplinary management with the oncology team. In patients with CML treated with drugs causing PH-induced PAH, discontinuation of the potential culprit therapy is recommended if there is a high probability of new PH (peak TRV . 3.4 m/s, equating to an estimated sPAP of ≥50 mmHg) until the diagnosis is confirmed or ruled out by a rightheart catheterization. In CML patients on dasatinib, an alternative BCR-ABL TKI is recommended if they develop symptomatic PAH or an asymptomatic increase in peak TRV .3.4 m/s. Dasatinib dose reduction and close monitoring of peak TRV with TTE every 4 weeks should be considered in CML patients who develop new asymptomatic peak TRV ranging from 2.9 to 3.4 m/s.620 If peak TRV remains normal or mildly elevated on serial monitoring, then dasatinib can continue, with reduced TTE monitoring to every 3

Recommendation Table 36 — Recommendation for management of peripheral artery disease during anticancer treatment

Recommendation Classa Levelb

In patients who develop new symptomatic PAD, a multidisciplinary approach regarding the decision to continue vs. interrupt culprit cancer therapyc is recommended. I C © ESC 2022

PAD, peripheral artery disease; VEGFi, vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cVEGFi, nilotinib, ponatinib, platins, etc. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

months. If peak TRV continues to rise, then right-heart catheterization should be performed, dasatinib treatment should be stopped, and PAH drugs should be considered if PAH is confirmed.

6.10 Pericardial diseases

Pericarditis and pericardial effusion can be related to a wide range of cancer treatments including chest radiation, cytotoxic therapies (anthracyclines, bleomycin, cyclophosphamide, cytarabine), targeted therapies (all-trans retinoic acid, arsenic trioxide, dasatinib), and immune-based therapies (interleukin-2, interferon-αICI). A combination of therapies may have a synergistic effect on the pericardium. These therapy-induced complications must be differentiated from progressive cancer (local invasion, metastatic involvement, or mediastinal lymphatic drainage obstruction) and non-cancer-related causes such as infection, especially in immune-compromised patients.622 A careful history and clinical examination are of help to determine the cause. TTE plays a central role in diagnosis and management. CT and CMR can provide additional information on pericardial inflammation and constrictive physiology. The principles for the diagnosis and management should follow the 2015 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of pericardial diseases,444 but there are some specific issues to consider in patients with cancer.482

6.10.1 Pericarditis

The diagnosis of pericarditis in patients with cancer follows the same principles as in those without, but symptoms can be atypical.444 Acute pericarditis caused by radiation has become rare due to lower doses and improved radiation techniques. It occurs within days to weeks after treatment and is usually self-limiting, but can evolve towards constrictive pericarditis many years later (Section 8.6). Pericarditis caused by conventional cancer therapies often resolves with standard therapy or after discontinuation of the treatment.444

Cancer treatment interruption should be discussed with the cardio-oncology team. Treatment with anti-inflammatory drugs (e.g. ibuprofen) and colchicine, in the absence of contraindications, is recommended as it reduces the rate of recurrence requiring repeat intervention.623 Low-to-moderate doses of steroids are only indicated for resistant cases except ICI-related pericarditis.444 ICI-associated pericarditis has a median time of onset of 30 days in retrospective surveillance studies and is associated with a poor prognosis, especially in case of concomitant myocarditis.444,624 In patients with severe ICI-associated pericarditis with moderate or severe effusion, ICI discontinuation and high-dose steroids (methylprednisolone 1 mg/kg/day) with or without colchicine are recommended, as well as pericardiocentesis in case of cardiac tamponade.624,625 In case of refractory pericarditis, immunosuppressive drugs should be considered. For uncomplicated ICI-related pericarditis, the ICI might be continued and colchicine or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs could be considered.326,444 For patients requiring ICI discontinuation, restarting ICI can be considered in a MDT discussion after resolution of pericardial disease and under close monitoring.

6.10.2 Pericardial effusion

Pericardial effusions are often observed as an incidental finding in patients with cancer. Cancer therapy is the cause of a pericardial effusion in ,30% of cases, although this may increase with the expanding use of ICI in cancer. Malignancy-related pericardial effusions caused by direct (lung, oesophageal, breast) or metastatic invasion (haematological malignancies, ovarian, melanoma) or by lymph node obstruction are generally associated with poor prognosis. Clinical presentation depends on the size of the effusion and the speed of its growth.444 Malignancy-related pericardial effusions make up .30% of patients presenting with cardiac tamponade626 and usually develop slowly, resulting in larger pericardial effusions at the time of diagnosis compared with non-malignant pericardial effusions. Management consists of determination of the cause and evaluation of the haemodynamic impact. Small-to-medium-sized effusions (.4 and ,20 mm) can be monitored with a reassessment 7–14 days after initial diagnosis and at further 4–6-weekly intervals.444,627 In unstable patients with signs of tamponade, immediate echocardiographic-guided percutaneous pericardiocentesis is preferred over surgical pericardiotomy to minimize potential complications.628 In patients with cardiac tamponade due to malignant pericardial effusions, colchicine may be useful to improve clinical outcomes and reduce the rate of repeat intervention.623 Drainage of a pericardial effusion related to ICI is rarely required629 and corticosteroids should be considered.630 Intrapericardial instillation of cytostatic/sclerosing agents, colchicine,623 and radiation for radiation-sensitive tumours can reduce recurrence after drainage. The creation of a pleuropericardial or pleuroperitoneal window with balloon pericardiotomy or surgery should be considered in case of recurrent malignant pericardial effusions after emergency pericardiocentesis.444 A surgical pericardial window should be considered if the percutaneous approach is not feasible and in stable patients with large (≥20 mm) or rapidly expanding malignant pericardial effusions prior to the development of cardiac tamponade.

Recommendation Table 37 — Recommendations for the management of pulmonary hypertension during anticancer treatment

Recommendations Classa Levelb

Right-heart catheterization and discontinuation of dasatinib is recommended in patients who develop symptomatic or asymptomatic increase in peak TRV .3.4 m/s. I C Dasatinib dose reduction and close monitoring of peak TRV with echocardiography should be considered in patients who develop new asymptomatic peak TRV ranging from 2.9 to 3.4 m/s. IIa C In patients with confirmed dasatinib-induced PAHc or new asymptomatic peak TRV .3.4 m/s, an alternative BCR-ABL inhibitor is recommended after peak TRV recovery to ,2.8 m/s. I C © ESC 2022

BCL-ABL, breakpoint cluster region–Abelson oncogene locus; PAH, pulmonary arterial hypertension; TRV, tricuspid regurgitation velocity. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cDefinite diagnosis of PAH requires a right-heart catheterization. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

7 End-of-cancer therapy

cardiovascular risk assessment

7.1 Cardiovascular evaluation during the

first year after cardiotoxic anticancer therapy End-of-cancer therapy CV risk assessment covers the first 12 months after the last cardiotoxic cancer treatment. These recommendations are where cardiotoxic cancer therapy has been successfully completed with good long-term prognosis. These recommendations are not indicated when cancer therapies are discontinued due to cancer progression and prognosis is poor, or where end-of-life care is indicated. Selected patients with cancer continue on long-term oncology therapies, e.g. women with oestrogen receptor-positive early invasive BC. In this example, the end-of-therapy risk assessment refers to the timepoint from the last anthracycline or trastuzumab dose.

High-risk patients can be identified at completion of their cardiotoxic cancer therapies by their clinical characteristics, history of CTR-CVT during treatment, and by elevated cardiac biomarkers and/or abnormal CV imaging at follow up.53,54,92 Cardiac serum biomarkers (NP and cTn) are useful given their high negative predictive value for future CV events.197,631 In a prospective study of 2625 adult patients with cancer that assessed LVEF after anthracycline-based chemotherapy, the overall incidence of CTRCD was 9%; 98% of cases could be detected within 12 months after chemotherapy and the median time from chemotherapy to CTRCD detection was 3.5 months (interquartile range 3–6 months).208 The response to ACE-I treatment declined when the interval between the end of chemotherapy and CTRCD detection lengthened; complete LVEF recovery was not observed in patients where treatment was delayed by .6 months.425 Measurement of cTn after completion of anthracycline chemotherapy during the end-of-treatment assessment should be considered. Rises in cTnI after anthracycline chemotherapy identify patients at risk of future cardiac dysfunction who then benefit from CV protection.4 Educating patients with cancer of their potential increased CVD risk and supporting them to make appropriate healthy lifestyle choices is recommended. CS should also be advised to promptly report early signs and symptoms of possible CVD and inform medical teams of their previous cardiotoxic cancer therapies. CVRF including hypertension, DM, and dyslipidaemia correlate with the probability of future CV events in CS and should be well controlled after completion of cancer therapy.31,632,633

7.2 Which cancer survivors require

cardiovascular surveillance in the first year after cancer treatment? The end-of-treatment risk assessment ideally identifies those high-risk CS, who require long-term CV surveillance, based on the following criteria (Table 10): (1) Baseline high or very high risk based on HFA-ICOS risk assessment tools12 (Section 4). (2) Cardiotoxic cancer therapy with a high risk of long-term CV complications7,21 (Section 8). (3) Moderate or severe CTR-CVT diagnosed during cancer treat-

ment (Table 3).68 (4) New abnormalities in cardiac function detected by echocardiog-

raphy, new elevated cardiac serum biomarkers, or newly CV symptoms detected at the end-of-therapy assessment (3 or 12 months after treatment).68,208

The timing of the first CV assessment after cardiotoxic cancer treatment depends on the risk defined by baseline CV assessment, the type of cancer therapy, and whether CTR-CVT was diagnosed during treatment. In asymptomatic high-risk patients (Table 10), echocardiography and cardiac serum biomarkers are recommended at 3 and 12 months after completion of cancer therapy.53,54,59,61,68,148,208,425 In

Recommendation Table 38 — Recommendations for the management of pericardial diseases in patients receiving anticancer treatment

Recommendations Classa Levelb

General Diagnosis and management of acute pericarditis in patients with cancer based on the 2015 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of pericardial diseases is recommended and a multidisciplinary discussion is needed before interrupting cancer therapy.444 I C A surgical pericardial window should be considered if the percutaneous approach is not feasible or in cases of recurrent malignant pericardial effusions. IIa C Intrapericardial instillation of cytostatic or sclerosing agents may be considered for prevention of recurrence. IIb C Diagnosis and management of ICI-associated pericarditis Multimodality CV imaging (echocardiography, CMR + CT), ECG and measurement of cardiac biomarkers are recommended to confirm the diagnosis, assess the haemodynamic consequences of pericardial disease, and rule out associated myocarditis. I C Prednisolone and colchicine are recommended for patients with ICI-associated pericarditis.326,624,625,630 I C Interruption of ICI treatment in patients with confirmed ICI-associated pericarditis with moderate-to-severe pericardial effusion is recommended. I C A multidisciplinary discussion is recommended before restarting ICI treatment. I C © ESC 2022

CMR, cardiac magnetic resonance; CT, computed tomography; CV, cardiovascular; ECG, electrocardiogram; ESC, European Society of Cardiology; ICI, immune checkpoint inhibitors. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

asymptomatic moderate-risk patients (according to CV toxicity baseline risk stratification), echocardiography and cardiac serum biomarkers should be considered within 12 months after completion of cancer therapy.53,54,59,61,68,148,208 In asymptomatic low-risk patients (according to CV toxicity baseline risk stratification), echocardiography and cardiac serum biomarkers may be considered within 12 months after completion of cancer therapy.634 All patients started on CV therapies (ACE-I/ARB/angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors, beta-blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors, antihypertensive medications, antiarrhythmic medications, antiplatelet therapies, statins) for any CTR-CVT (especially CTRCD) should have a clinical assessment, ECG, echocardiography, and cardiac serum biomarkers (if LV systolic dysfunction/HF is a potential risk) at 3, 6, and 12 months after completing cancer treatment. A MDT-based approach to palliative and end-of-life care for patients with cancer with HF or other CTR-CVT should be focused on symptom relief according to general ESC Guidelines. 7.3 Management of cancer

therapy-related cardiac dysfunction at the end-of-therapy assessment During this end-of-treatment assessment, a review of cardioprotective medications initiated during cancer therapy to treat CTRCD is recommended (Figure 37). In selected patients with asymptomatic mild or moderate CTRCD who have fully recovered with normal TTE and cardiac serum biomarkers, a trial of weaning off CV medication should be considered after MDT discussion. This is most common after asymptomatic mild or moderate CTRCD secondary to trastuzumab, particularly in younger otherwise healthy HER2+ BC survivors with no exposure to anthracycline chemotherapy. Further assessment of cardiac function with TTE and cardiac serum biomarkers is recommended following withdrawal of CV medication in patients with previous CTRCD to ensure cardiac function remains normal. Continuing long-term CV medication is generally recommended in patients with moderate and severe symptomatic or severe asymptomatic CTRCD due to the high rate of recurrent HF. Long-term treatment is also recommended in CS with mild or moderate CTRCD who fail to recover normal LV function at their end-of-therapy assessment (Figure 37).

7.4 Cardiopulmonary exercise testing

and fitness during the end-of-therapy assessment CRF impairment is a strong predictor of patient outcome following cancer treatment and an intervention target in CS. Low CRF is associated with poor quality of life, increased morbidity, reduced exercise cardiac function and worse CVD risk profile, and is a robust independent predictor of all-cause, cancer-related, and CVD-related mortality in CS.119,120 Recent evidence suggests the risk of CVD-related mortality in CS decreases by 14% per 1 metabolic equivalent (3.5 mL O2/kg/min) increase in CRF.120 CPET may be considered for CS with exertional limitation, who may have substantial benefit from cardiac rehabilitation. Eligible patients include those treated with higher doses of anthracycline chemotherapy and/or RT to a volume including the heart, high CV toxicity risk at baseline, patients who developed CTRCD during cancer therapy, and those identified with new abnormalities in LV function at their end-of-therapy assessment.11 CPET can be an objective tool in the diagnosis of decreased physical capacity and identify CV vs. non-CV causes.635

7.5 The role of cardiac rehabilitation

Exercise is a potent multitargeted therapy that prevents and treats multiple competing mechanisms of CTR-CVT in CS, including CRF impairment,636 CV injury, and pre-existing and new CVRF.137 Prescribing exercise facilitates the delivery of therapeutic exercise that is individualized to a person’s fitness level and systematically progressed to optimize physiological adaptation.637 Current evidence demonstrates that supervised exercise therapy (including high-intensity interval training [HIIT]) is safe and well tolerated,638 attenuates CTR-CVT risk, and improves CRF. Furthermore, HIIT reduces CVRF460 and CV risk639 in patients

Table 10 Risk factors for future cardiovascular disease at the end-of-cancer therapy cardiovascular risk assessment

High-risk conditions

High- and very-high baseline CV toxicity risk based on HFA-ICOS assessment Specific anticancer treatment proven to have a high risk of long-term CV complicationsa

Doxorubicinb ≥250 mg/m2 RT . 15 Gy MHDc Both doxorubicinb ≥100 mg/m2 and RT 5–15 Gy MHDd High-risk HSCT patientse Moderate or severe CTR-CVT during cancer treatment (especially CTRCD), ICI-related myocarditis, cardiac arrhythmias, or severe vascular toxicities (ACS, stroke, PVD) New CV symptoms or new asymptomatic abnormalities in echocardiography and/or cardiac serum biomarkers at the end of therapy assessment © ESC 2022

ACS, acute coronary syndromes; CTRCD, cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction; CTR-CVT, cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity; CV, cardiovascular; CVD, cardiovascular disease; CVRF, cardiovascular risk factors; GVHD, graft vs. host disease; Gy, Gray; HFA, Heart Failure Association; HSCT, haematopoietic stem cell transplantation; ICI, immune checkpoint inhibitors; ICOS, International Cardio-Oncology Society; MHD, mean heart dose; PVD, peripheral vascular disease; RT, radiotherapy. aRT risk categorization based on MHD is recommended over categorization based on prescribed dose, which may not accurately reflect cardiac radiation exposure. Depending on dose distribution and exposure of specific cardiac substructures (as well as clinical risk factors), the treatment team may judge the patient to belong to a higher risk category. In addition, a patient may be judged to belong to a lower risk category if only a small part of the heart is exposed to a relatively high prescribed dose (i.e. RT to left breast or left chest wall only). bOr doxorubicin equivalent. cOr prescribed RT ≥35 Gy to a volume exposing the heart if MHD is not available. dOr prescribed RT 15–34 Gy to a volume exposing the heart if MHD is not available. eHigh-risk HSCT patients: allogenic HSCT; pre-existing CVD or multiple uncontrolled CVRF; cancer treatment history (mediastinal or mantle field radiation, alkylating agents, .250 mg/m2 doxorubicin or equivalent); conditioning schemes (total body irradiation, alkylating agents); development of GVHD. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

with cancer in the pre-, active-, and post-treatment settings. HIIT-related benefits on CRF, physical activity behaviour, fatigue, and quality of life persist months post-intervention.640,641 HIIT may not be feasible in elderly and frail patients.642 Dedicated cardio-oncology rehabilitation programmes are currently under development.11

CTRCD

Mild or moderate

Pa r tial or none a

Full b

High risk d

k k L o w risk e

k k

MDT to consider w eaning HF ther a p y

p p c

Rec o v e r y

Patient risk S e v e r e and v e r y s e v e r e

N

Patients who d e v elop CTRCD during cancer t r eatment and a r e being sta r ted on HF ther a p y

p

p

Y Conti n ue HF ther a p y

p p

(Class I)

Conti n ue HF ther a p y

p p (Class I) Consider w eaning

HF ther a p y

p p (Class IIa)

Figure 37 Management of cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction after cancer therapy. CTRCD, cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction; CV, cardiovascular; GLS, global longitudinal strain; HF, heart failure; HFA, Heart Failure Association; ICOS, International Cardio-Oncology Society; LV, left ventricular; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; MDT, multidisciplinary team; N, no; Y, yes. aPartial or no recovery: patients who do not meet all of the criteria for full recovery. bFull recovery: no signs or symptoms of HF + LVEF . 50% + GLS within normal range or similar to baseline measurements + cardiac serum biomarkers within the normal range or similar to baseline measurements cThe CTRCD trajectory of each patient is unique and dynamic and withdrawal of HF therapy requires a MDT to consider several key points that help to stratify patients into low- or high-risk categories. Key points to consider during a MDT discussion are: HFA-ICOS baseline CV toxicity risk assessment, pre-existing indications for CV medication, class of cancer treatment causing CTRCD (generally reversible vs. generally irreversible), magnitude and duration of CTRCD before recovery, intensity of HF therapy needed to recover LV function, family history of cardiomyopathy or known cardiomyopathy gene carrier (see Section 4.8). dSee Table 10. eLow-risk patient characteristics: low to moderate baseline CV toxicity risk (HFA-ICOS risk assessment), no pre-existing indications for CV medication, cancer treatment generally associated with reversible myocardial damage, asymptomatic mild CTRCD, early cardiac function recovery (3–6 months) under HF therapy, no family history of cardiomyopathy. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

8 Long-term follow-up and

chronic cardiovascular complications in cancer survivors

8.1 Cancer survivors

8.1.1. Adult survivors of childhood and adolescent cancer The survival of children and adolescents with cancer has increased considerably in recent decades, with 5-year survival rates currently exceeding 80%.647 However, the long-term health effects in the growing population of childhood and adolescent CS are a major concern.648 CTR-CVT, as a consequence of treatment with anthracyclines, mitoxantrone, and/or chest-directed RT can manifest as CTRCD but also as VHD, CAD, arrhythmias, autonomic dysfunction, pericardial disease, and premature CV mortality, depending on the type of cardiotoxic treatment.643,649 CTRCD is one of the most frequent late effects in childhood CS who received cardiotoxic cancer treatment and contributes to significant morbidity and non-cancer-related mortality later in life.650 The cumulative incidence of CTRCD varies depending on the diagnostic criteria applied and the population studied and ranges from 4.8% to 10.6% at 40–45 years of age.651 RT to a field involving the heart increases the risk of CTRCD and valvular and vascular complications.652 Follow-up of paediatric CS according to the International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group is recommended.653 This includes risk stratification based upon the total cumulative dose of anthracycline chemotherapy and MHD delivered (Table 11). Annual review of CVRF and education to promote a healthy lifestyle is recommended. The frequency of CV review with TTE depends upon risk. A CV review should be considered every 5 years for moderate-risk childhood and adolescent adult CS and every 2 years for high-risk childhood and adolescent adult CS. A recent retrospective analysis has shown that quantification of LVEF .5 years after cancer diagnosis improves long-term childhood

Recommendation Table 39 — Recommendations for end-of-cancer therapy cardiovascular risk assessment

Recommendations Classa Levelb

Educating and supporting patients with cancer to make appropriate healthy lifestyle choices is recommended.c I C Education is recommended for patients with cancer regarding recognition for early signs and symptoms of CVD. I C CVRF assessment is recommended during the first year after cancer therapyc,12,22,31,632,643 and thereafter according to the 2021 ESC Guidelines on CVD prevention in clinical practice.19 I B In asymptomatic high-risk patients,d echocardiography and cardiac serum biomarkers are recommended at 3 and 12 months after completion of cancer therapy.53,54,59,61,68,148,208,425 I B In asymptomatic moderate-risk patients,e echocardiography and cardiac serum biomarkers should be considered within 12 months after completion of cancer therapy.53,54,59,61,68,148,208 IIa B In asymptomatic low-risk patients,e echocardiography and cardiac serum biomarkers may be considered within 12 months after completion of cancer therapy.634 IIb C Cardiology referralf is recommended in patients with cancer with new cardiac symptoms or new asymptomatic abnormalities in echocardiography and/or cardiac serum biomarkers at the end of therapy assessment.11 I C In selected patients with exercise intolerance persisting at 12 months after cancer treatment and with normal resting echocardiogram and cardiac biomarkers, exercise stress echocardiography and/or CPET may be considered. IIb C Targeted cardiac rehabilitation should be considered in CS with high CV risk.638–640 IIa B Long-term continuation of cardiac medication is recommended in patients who develop severe CTRCD during cancer therapy. I C CV follow-up and treatment optimization is recommended in patients who developed TKI-mediated hypertension during cancer therapy.644,645 I C CV follow-up and treatment optimization is recommended in patients who developed vascular toxicities during cancer therapy.10,237 I C

Continued ECG follow-up is recommended in patients who developed QT lengthening or LQTS during cancer

therapy.646 I C © ESC 2022

CPET, cardiopulmonary exercise testing; CS, cancer survivors; CTRCD, cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction; CV, cardiovascular; CVD, cardiovascular disease; CVRF, cardiovascular risk factors; DM, diabetes mellitus; ECG, electrocardiogram; ESC, European Society of Cardiology; LQTS, long QT syndrome; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitors. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cIncluding regulation of hypertension, DM, dyslipidaemia, smoking cessation, weight loss in case of obesity, and an adequate amount of exercise. dHigh-risk patients: see Table 10. eModerate- or low-risk patients: according to CV toxicity baseline risk stratification. fCardio-oncology referral is recommended when available; alternatively, the patient should be referred to a cardiologist with expertise in managing CVD in patients with cancer. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

CS risk stratification. A LVEF of 40–49% is associated with an almost eight-fold increased risk for LVEF ,40% at 10-year follow-up compared with patients with a preserved LVEF (≥50%).654 Lifelong surveillance for high-risk survivors is recommended.7 8.1.2 Adult cancer survivors

Long-term cancer survivorship care is an advancing field of research. Many survivors will experience several cancer- and treatment-related late effects throughout their lives, including CTR-CVT. Besides affecting their physical and psychosocial health status, these might reduce life expectancy and quality of life. This is relevant in some cancer types, when CVD risk—especially CTRCD risk—exceeds cancer mortality.658,659 The risk of fatal heart disease is increased more than twofold in survivors of several solid cancers and lymphoma compared with the general population.660–662 CV risk assessment at the end of therapy (Section 7) identifies CS who require long-term cardiology follow-up beyond the first 12 months after completing their cancer treatment. Asymptomatic CS with new or persisting abnormalities at their end-of-therapy assessment will be identified as at high risk for future CV events and require long-term surveillance. Specific cancer treatments carry the highest risk of long-term CV toxicity including anthracycline chemotherapy and RT where the heart is within the RT treatment volume. Progressive RT-related CV toxicity typically develops 5–10 years after the initial treatment, and may cause CAD and HF at an incidence up to six-fold higher than in the general population. An increased CV mortality compared with the general population has been attributed to radiation-associated heart disease in Hodgkin lymphoma, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, BC, and patients with lung cancer.663–665 The incidence and progression of the radiation-related CV complications depends on the dose to the CV tissue and on concomitant cancer therapies and patient characteristics, such as pre-existing CVD, CVRF, and age.389,400 Late CV complications are also observed in CS who required HSCT. The incidence of HF increases up to 14.5% in women 15 years after HSCT. Risk factors for CVD following HSCT include age, anthracycline dose, chest radiation exposure, hypertension, DM, and smoking.666 Long-term follow-up surveillance, based on CV toxicity risks (Table 12), includes patient education and CVRF optimization. An annual clinical CV risk assessment is recommended for all adult CS to optimize CVRF control, promote a healthy lifestyle, and symptom review. This can be done in collaboration with primary care or a

Table 11 Risk categories for asymptomatic adults who are childhood and adolescent cancer survivors Risk category RT dosea (Gy MHD) Total cumulative doxorubicinb

dose (mg/m2) Combination therapy

RT dosea (Gy MHD) Total cumulative doxorubicinb

dose (mg/m2)

Very high risk .25c ≥400 .15c ≥100 High risk .15 to 25c 250–399 5–15d ≥100 Moderate risk 5–15d 100–249 ,5e ≥100 Low risk ,5e ,100 – © ESC 2022

Gy, Gray; MHD, mean heart dose; RT, radiotherapy. aRT risk categorization based on MHD is recommended over categorization based on prescribed dose, which may not accurately reflect cardiac radiation exposure. Depending on dose distribution and exposure of specific cardiac substructures (as well as clinical risk factors), the treatment team may judge the patient to belong to a higher risk category. In addition, a patient may be judged to belong to a lower risk category if only a small part of the heart is exposed to a relatively high prescribed dose. bOr doxorubicin equivalent. cOr prescribed RT ≥35 Gy to a volume exposing the heart if MHD is not available. Note that in this case, the limited information about cardiac exposure does not allow one to distinguish between high- and very high-risk categories. dOr prescribed RT 15–34 Gy to a volume exposing the heart if MHD is not available. eOr prescribed RT , 15 Gy to a volume exposing the heart if MHD is not available.

Recommendation Table 40 — Recommendations for cardiovascular surveillance in asymptomatic adults who are childhood and adolescent cancer survivors

Recommendations Classa Levelb

Education of adults who are childhood and adolescent CS treated with anthracyclines, mitoxantrone, and/or RT to a volume including the heart and their healthcare providers regarding their increased CV risk is recommended.655–657 I B Annual screening for modifiable CVRFc is recommended in adults who are childhood and adolescent CS treated with anthracyclines, mitoxantrone, and/or RT to a volume including the heart. I C CV assessmentd is recommended in female childhood and adolescent CS prior to pregnancy or in the first trimester. I C Echocardiography surveillance should be considered every 2 years in adults who are high-risk childhood and adolescente CS.7 IIa B Echocardiography surveillance should be considered every 5 years in adults who are moderate-risk childhood and adolescente CS.7,654 IIa B © ESC 2022

BP, blood pressure; CS, cancer survivors; CV, cardiovascular; CVRF, cardiovascular risk factors; DM, diabetes mellitus; ECG, electrocardiogram; HbA1c, glycated haemoglobin; RT, radiotherapy; TTE, transthoracic echocardiography. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cObesity, sedentary lifestyle, cigarette smoking, alcohol intake, unhealthy diet, dyslipidaemia, hypertension, DM. dBP, lipids, fasting glucose, HbA1c, ECG, and TTE. eSee Table 11. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

specialist in CV medicine with expertise in CVRF management. CS at high or very high risk of future CVD can be divided into those at high early risk (within 5 years of completing cancer therapy) and those at high late risk (.30 years from completing treatment). The timing and frequency of other complementary tests depends upon the risk for CTR-CVT (Figure 38). CS with a high or very high baseline risk and patients with abnormal LV function at the end-of-therapy assessment have a high or very high early risk, particularly in the first 2 years.61,667,668 Annual CV assessment with clinical examination, ECG, and NP measurement is recommended in CS. TTE should be considered at years 1, 3, and 5 after completion of cardiotoxic cancer therapy and every 5 years thereafter in asymptomatic very high- and early high-risk adult CS.

In adult CS with late high CTR-CVT risk (e.g. young adults with Hodgkin lymphoma or sarcomas who received a high total cumulative anthracycline dose or patients treated with high-dose radiation to a field involving the heart, e.g. Mantle RT) there is a progressive risk of CTRCD.661,669 Annual CV assessment with clinical examination, ECG, and NP measurement is recommended, starting 5 years after the end of treatment, provided the end-of-therapy assessment at 12 months is normal. TTE should also be considered every 5 years, as well as non-invasive screening for CAD (Section 8.3) and carotid disease (Section 8.5) according to local protocols.670 The long-term effects of CTRCD caused by trastuzumab and other targeted cancer therapies (e.g. TKI) beyond 10 years are unknown. Currently, there is no recommendation for lifelong surveillance in these CS unless they have another indication. CV assessment with clinical examination, ECG, echocardiography, and NP measurement every 5 years should be considered in asymptomatic adult CS at moderate risk of future CTR-CVT and a normal end-of-therapy CV assessment.

Table 12 Risk categories for asymptomatic adult cancer survivors

Risk categorya Patient characteristics

Very high risk • Very high baseline CV toxicity risk

pre-treatment • Doxorubicinb ≥400 mg/m2 • RT . 25 Gy MHDc • RT . 15–25 Gy MHDc + doxorubicinb

≥100 mg/m2

Early high risk (,5 years after therapy) • High baseline CV toxicity risk • Symptomatic or asymptomatic

moderate-to-severe CTRCD during treatment • Doxorubicinb 250–399 mg/m2 • High-risk HSCTd

Late high risk • RT . 15–25 Gy MHDc

• RT 5–15 Gy MHDe + doxorubicinb

≥100 mg/m2 • Poorly controlled CVRF

Moderate risk • Moderate baseline CV toxicity risk • Doxorubicinb 100–249 mg/m2

• RT 5–15 Gy MHDe • RT , 5 Gy MHDf + doxorubicinb ≥100 mg/ m2

Low risk • Low baseline CV toxicity risk and normal end-of-therapy cardiac assessment

• Mild CTRCD during therapy but recovered by the end of cancer therapy • RT , 5 Gy MHDf • Doxorubicinb , 100 mg/m2 © ESC 2022

CTRCD, cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction; CV, cardiovascular; CVD, cardiovascular disease; CVRF, cardiovascular risk factors; GVHD, graft vs. host disease; Gy, Gray; HSCT, haematopoietic stell cell transplantation; MHD, mean heart dose; RT, radiotherapy. References:397,399,400,673,674 aRT risk categorization based on MHD is recommended over categorization based on prescribed dose, which may not accurately reflect cardiac radiation exposure. Depending on dose distribution and exposure of specific cardiac substructures (as well as clinical risk factors), the treatment team may judge the patient to belong to a higher risk category. In addition, a patient may be judged to belong to a lower risk category in case only a small part of the heart is exposed to a relatively high prescribed dose. bOr equivalent. cOr prescribed RT≥35 Gy to a volume exposing the heart if MHD is not available. Note that in this case, the limited information about cardiac exposure does not allow one to distinguish between high- and very high-risk categories. dHigh-risk HSCT patients: allogenic HSCT; pre-existing CVD or multiple uncontrolled CVRF; cancer treatment history (mediastinal or mantle field radiation, alkylating agents, .250 mg/m2 doxorubicin or equivalent); conditioning schemes (total body irradiation, alkylating agents); development of GVHD. eOr prescribed RT 15–34 Gy to a volume exposing the heart if MHD is not available. fOr prescribed RT , 15 Gy to a volume exposing the heart if MHD is not available. Recommendation Table 41 — Recommendations for cardiovascular surveillance in asymptomatic adult cancer survivors

Recommendations Classa Levelb Annual CV risk assessment,c including ECG and NP, and CVRF management is recommended in CS who were treated with a potentially cardiotoxic cancer drug or RT.d,631–633,671,672 I B CV toxicity risk restratificatione is recommended 5 years after therapy to organize long-term follow-up. I C Echocardiography at years 1, 3, and 5 after completion of cardiotoxic cancer therapy and every 5 years thereafter should be considered in asymptomatic very high- and early high-risk adult CS.f IIa C Echocardiography should be considered in asymptomatic late high-risk adult CSf starting at 5 years after radiation to a volume including the heart and then every 5 years. IIa C Echocardiography may be considered every 5 years in asymptomatic moderate-risk adult CS.f IIb C Non-invasive screening for CADg should be considered every 5–10 years in asymptomatic patients who received .15 Gy MHD,d starting at 5 years after radiation. IIa C Carotid ultrasound imaging should be considered every 5 years in asymptomatic patients with a history of head/neck RT, starting at 5 years after radiation and every 5–10 years thereafter. IIa C

Continued Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

8.2 Myocardial dysfunction and heart

failure HF treatment in CS should follow the current 2021 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic HF.14 Treatment with ACE-I/ARB and/or beta-blockers is recommended for both symptomatic and asymptomatic CS who have LVEF , 50% detected on CV assessment.14,61,208,675 In CS with mild asymptomatic CTRCD detected on CV assessment (LVEF . 50% but new fall in GLS and/or cardiac serum biomarker increase), treatment with ACE-I/ARB and/or beta-blockers may be considered.

Renal artery ultrasound should be considered in patients with a history of abdominal and pelvic radiation who present with worsening renal function and/or systemic hypertension. IIa C © ESC 2022

BP, blood pressure; CAD, coronary artery disease; CMR, cardiac magnetic resonance; CS, cancer survivors; CT, computed tomography; CTR-CVT, cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity; CV, cardiovascular; CVD, cardiovascular disease; CVRF, cardiovascular risk factors; ECG, electrocardiogram; HbA1c, glycated haemoglobin; MHD, mean heart dose; NP, natriuretic peptides; RT, radiotherapy. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cClinical review, BP, lipid profile, HbA1c. dRT risk categorization based on MHD is recommended over categorization based on prescribed dose (≥35 Gy to a volume exposing the heart if MHD is not available). eRestratification includes evaluation of new or pre-existing CVRF and CVD (including CTR-CVT). fSee Table 12. gStress echocardiography, cardiac CT, stress CMR, single-photon emission CT stress test, according to local protocol.234

Long-term surveillance in asymptomatic CS

High and very high

risk

Moderate

risk

Low risk

Class 1 Class 1Ia Class 1Ib

TTE every 2 years in adults who are childhood

and adolescent CS

TTE at years 1, 3, and 5 after cardiotoxic cancer therapy and every 5 years thereafter in adult CS

Annual CV risk

assessmenta

CV toxicity risk re-stratificationc

at 5 years

Patient education and CVRF optimization

Cardiology referralb if new CV symptoms develop TTE every 5 years in adults who are childhood

and adolescent CS

TTE every 5 years in

adult CS

Figure 38 Long-term follow-up in cancer survivors. BP, blood pressure; CAD, coronary artery disease; CS, cancer survivors; CTR-CVT, cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity; CV, cardiovascular; CVD, cardiovascular disease; CVRF, cardiovascular risk factors; ECG, electrocardiogram; HbA1c, glycated haemoglobin; NP, natriuretic peptides; TTE, transthoracic echocardiography. aClinical review, BP, lipid profile, HbA1c, ECG, NP. In selected patients, non-invasive screening for CAD and carotid or renal diseases every 5–10 years, starting at 5 years after radiation may be considered. bCardio-oncology referral is recommended when available; alternatively, the patient should be referred to a specialized cardiologist with expertise in managing CVD in patients with cancer. cRestratification includes evaluation of new or pre-existing CVRF and CVD (including CTR-CVT). Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

8.3 Coronary artery disease

Any vascular location within the RT treatment volume is at increased risk for both accelerated atherosclerosis and RT-related vasculopathy.173,392 RT to the chest (e.g. treatment of Hodgkin lymphoma, early-stage BC, lung and oesophageal cancer, and for some patients receiving infradiaphragmatic irradiation if the apex of the heart is within the treatment volume) increases the risk of CAD. The latency between RT and the appearance of CAD varies from a few years to several decades, depending upon the presence or absence of preexisting atherosclerosis and the age of the patient at the time of RT. This is a serious complication for young CS with a good prognosis and long-life expectancy (e.g. BC and Hodgkin lymphoma).389,390 Patients treated for mediastinal Hodgkin lymphoma have shown an increased risk of CAD as a first cardiac event.400 RT-induced CAD depends on the location of the RT treatment volume and most commonly affects either the proximal left anterior descending or the right coronary arteries. RT-related vasculopathy is progressive and typically manifests in severe, diffuse, long, smooth and concentric angiographic lesions.679,680 The risk and severity of CAD increases with radiation dose, larger volume exposed, younger age at time of treatment (,25 years),390 time from treatment, smoking,400 the presence of other typical CVRF, type of radiation source, and concurrent metabolic risk factors.493 RT accelerates pre-existing atherosclerosis leading to increased ACS risk within 10 years of treatment.681 Patients with RT-induced CAD undergoing PCI with bare-metal stent or balloon angioplasty have an increased risk of all-cause and CV mortality.682 Conversely, after PCI with a drug-eluting stent, there is no difference in target lesion revascularization or cardiac mortality between patients with and without prior chest RT.683 Surgical revascularization in patients with prior RT may be complicated by poor tissue healing (skin and sternum), RT-induced injury to the left and right internal mammary arteries (LIMA and RIMA, respectively), inadequate target coronary vessels, and increased sternotomy-related pain.684 Pre-operative assessment of internal mammary artery viability, venous access, and sternal wound healing is recommended in CS with RT-induced CAD where CABG is considered. PCI with drug-eluting stents may be considered over CABG in CS with RT-induced severe left main or three-vessel disease, with a high SYNTAX (SYNergy between percutaneous coronary intervention with TAXus and cardiac surgery) score (.22), in whom the planned PCI is technically feasible given the increased complications associated with CABG after mediastinal RT.

Screening for CAD should be considered in high-risk patients who have received chest RT to a treatment volume including the heart. Screening should take the form of functional imaging and/or CCTA beginning at 5 years post-RT.234,484 The natural history of RT-related vasculopathy is different to atherosclerosis and may accelerate rapidly.173 Functional cardiac imaging should be considered in asymptomatic CS with pre-existing CAD or when new significant CAD is detected on anatomical imaging. In asymptomatic patients with inducible ischaemia secondary to RT-induced CAD, a MDT is recommended to discuss revascularization needs according to the location of the RT-induced CAD, the ischaemia burden, LV function, arrhythmia burden, time since treatment, time since previous normal review (if available), concomitant valvular disease, risks of surgical or percutaneous revascularization, medical options, and patient preference.173 Platinum-based chemotherapies are now recognized to cause CAD in CS. Cisplatin-based chemotherapy for testicular cancer is associated with a 1.5–7-fold increased risk of developing CAD.421,493,685 Testicular CS who received platinum-based chemotherapy should have their CVRF tightly controlled and be educated to report any new chest pain or cardiac symptoms to their doctor promptly. The role of screening for CAD in patients who received platinum-based chemotherapy is unknown. Aggressive risk-factor modification and CV diagnostic work-up strongly enhance survival.5,672 Medical therapy with aspirin and statins for primary/secondary prevention, and beta-blockers and nitrates for symptom control, are recommended in CS.686,687

Recommendation Table 42 — Recommendations for adult cancer survivors who develop cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction late after cardiotoxic cancer therapy

Recommendations Classa Levelb

ACE-I/ARB and/or beta-blockers are recommended in adult CS with moderate asymptomatic CTRCD.c,208,425,675–678 I C ACE-I/ARB and/or beta-blockers may be considered in adult CS with mild asymptomatic CTRCD.d IIb C © ESC 2022

ACE-I, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors; ARB, angiotensin receptor blockers; CS, cancer survivors; CTRCD, cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction; GLS, global longitudinal strain; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cNew LVEF reduction by ≥10 percentage points to an LVEF of 40–49% OR new LVEF reduction by ,10 percentage points to an LVEF of 40–49% AND either new relative decline in GLS by .15% from baseline OR new rise in cardiac biomarkers. dLVEF ≥50% and new relative decline in GLS by .15% from baseline AND/OR new rise in cardiac biomarkers.

Recommendation Table 43 — Recommendations for adult cancer survivors with coronary artery disease

Recommendations Classa Levelb

Asymptomatic radiation-induced CAD detected during surveillance Non-invasive stress testingc is recommended in asymptomatic CS with new moderate or severe radiation-induced CAD detected on CCTA to guide ischaemia-directed management.635,688 I C A MDT discussion is recommended for clinical decision-making in patients with radiation-induced CAD and inducible ischaemia or severe left main CAD. I C Symptomatic CAD Pre-operative assessment of LIMA and RIMA viability, venous access, and sternal wound healing is recommended in CS with radiation-induced CAD where CABG is considered. I C

Continued Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

8.4 Valvular heart disease

VHD can appear in CS at any point in time but typically occurs 10 or more years after cancer treatment.691 Chest RT is the main risk factor in CS, in particular at higher dose ranges, which can cause either stenosis or regurgitation, or both.391 The reported incidences of valvular regurgitation are up to 40% of CS survivors who received high-dose chest RT to a volume involving the heart, with ,10% presenting with clinically significant VHD.670 Prognosis and management depend on the extent and severity of VHD, as it does in patients without cancer.692 TAVI should be considered for patients with symptomatic RT-induced severe aortic stenosis at intermediate surgical risk.504,506,693,694 Similar strategies with percutaneous mitral valve repair or replacement can be considered.695 Importantly, commonly used calculators such STS PROM (Society of Thoracic Surgeons–Predicted Risk of Mortality) or EuroSCORE (European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation) II507 may underestimate the surgery-related risk in CS, and especially those who develop RT-induced VHD, due to additional RT-related risk factors such as pericardial calcification, aortic calcification, increased bleeding risk, impaired skin healing, and RT-related pulmonary fibrosis. A Heart Team with cardiac surgeons, interventional cardiologists, and cardio-oncology specialists should review each case to guide appropriate treatment. The Heart Team recommendation should be discussed with the patient, who can then make an informed treatment choice. 8.5 Peripheral artery disease and stroke

Peripheral arterial and cerebrovascular disease in CS can be due to the continuum of vascular disease pre-existing before, or developing during or after cancer therapy. Cancer therapies such as cisplatin, BCR-ABL inhibitors, and RT can have a direct long-lasting effect on the vasculature. Approximately 30% of CML patients on nilotinib may develop PAD, which is clinically recognized 2–4 years after the start of therapy.698 The disease process may progress even after discontinuation of nilotinib. Long-term vascular effects, generally associated with vascular reactivity, can also be seen in patients treated with ponatinib, cisplatin, and bleomycin.699,700 Accelerated vascular aging, inflammation, fibrosis, and atherosclerosis are characteristic consequences of RT.701 Up to 30% of patients may develop significant carotid artery stenoses (.70%) after head/neck radiation.702,703 Vascular disease can also be an indirect consequence of cancer and its therapy, e.g. via reduction in physical activity, hyperlipidaemia, DM, obesity, hypothyroidism, and/or kidney disease. These CVRF-related effects are mostly additive to the direct treatment-related effects. Promoting vascular health and preventing vascular disease in CS is recommended.672 This should be in line with the 2021 ESC Guidelines on CVD prevention in clinical practice.19

8.6 Pericardial complications

The risk of long-term pericardial complications after cancer drug-induced acute pericarditis, caused by anthracyclines, cyclophosphamide, cytarabine, and bleomycin, is unknown but generally considered low. Long-term dasatinib treatment may lead to pericardial effusion and pericarditis. The incidence of long-term ICI-associated pericardial complications is low.10 RT-induced chronic pericardial diseases can appear months to decades after the initial RT and constrictive pericarditis is the most serious.173,392 Incidence is difficult to determine, and many cases are initially asymptomatic.704 Five-yearly echocardiographic surveillance for pericardial constriction in CS following RT-induced acute pericarditis may be considered. The absolute risk is considerably reduced with modern radiation protocols,704 but a high rate of pericardial effusion has still been reported in patients with lung (grade ≥2, .40%705) and oesophageal cancer (.25%706) treated with RT. Pericardial disease has been less investigated than other RT-induced CVD, and clear protocols for post-therapy surveillance are lacking.707,708 In CS with chronic pericardial effusions following RT, cardiac imaging can assess for evidence of inflammation,

PCI may be considered in CS with radiation-induced CAD with severe left main or three-vessel disease with a high SYNTAX score (.22) in whom the procedure is technically feasible.682,689,690 IIb B © ESC 2022

CABG, coronary artery bypass graft; CAD, coronary artery disease; CCTA, coronary computed tomography angiography; CS, cancer survivors; LIMA, left internal mammary artery; MDT, multidisciplinary team; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention; RIMA, right internal mammary artery; SYNTAX, SYNergy between percutaneous coronary intervention with TAXus and cardiac surgery. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cAccording to local protocols and Non-invasive imaging in coronary syndromes: recommendations of the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging and the American Society of Echocardiography, in collaboration with the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, and Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance recommendations.234

Recommendation Table 44 — Recommendations for adult cancer survivors with valvular heart disease

Recommendations Classa Levelb

A MDT approach is recommended to discuss and define the surgical riskc in CS with severe VHD. I C

Continued TAVI should be considered for patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis caused by

radiation at intermediate surgical risk.504,506,693,694,696,697 IIa B © ESC 2022

CS, cancer survivors; EuroSCORE, European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation; MDT, multidisciplinary team; STS PROM, Society of Thoracic Surgeons– Predicted Risk of Mortality; TAVI, transcatheter aortic valve implantation; VHD, valvular heart disease. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cSurgical risks include: vascular access, sternal and skin wound healing, concomitant cardiac disease, radiation-induced lung and thoracic vessels disease, aortic calcification, STS PROM/EuroSCORE II.

Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

constriction, or tamponade.709 Percutaneous balloon pericardiotomy or pericardial window creation should be used in selected cases for large or growing chronic effusions if haemodynamic compromise develops. Management of these conditions should follow general guideline recommendations.14,444

8.7 Arrhythmias and autonomic disease

Arrhythmias, conduction disease, and autonomic disease are common complications in CS. Conduction disease after thoracic RT is typically associated with other CTR-CVT.710 It may include AV block, bundle branch block, and sick sinus syndrome that should be monitored and treated according to the 2021 ESC Guidelines on cardiac pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy.443 Patients who require valve replacement after thoracic RT have a high risk of post-operative AV block requiring permanent pacemaker therapy.711 Supraventricular and ventricular arrhythmias are more common in patients after thoracic RT,712 possibly due to RT-induced myocardial fibrosis. A common long-term complication after HSCT is supraventricular arrhythmia including AF and atrial flutter,457 particularly in CS treated with anthracyclines or with new CVRF or CV toxicity. Autonomic dysfunction is an emerging but poorly understood complication observed in CS, and is most frequently observed as a late complication after thoracic RT. Orthostatic hypotension, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome, inappropriate sinus tachycardia, and loss of circadian heart rate variability can occur.713,714 Physicians caring for these patients should consider referral for autonomic evaluation. In addition, the perception of angina pain may be impaired,714 making the diagnosis of post-radiation CAD challenging. Evidence-based pharmacological treatment strategies are based on studies of patients with other autonomic dysfunction aetiologies (e.g. DM or infiltrative diseases) and the reported effectiveness is generally poor.714

8.8 Metabolic syndrome, lipid

abnormalities, diabetes mellitus, and hypertension There is a growing understanding about shared CVRF that may be responsible for cancer development or progression and premature CV morbi-mortality.34 Modifiable CVRF continue to be underdiagnosed and undertreated in CS, especially hypertension,715 obesity, DM, metabolic syndrome,716 and dyslipidaemia. Early diagnosis via standardized risk-based screening and management of these conditions according to general ESC Guidelines is recommended19 to improve long-term outcomes in CS.672

Increasing numbers of patients with cancer are already overweight or obese at cancer diagnosis,717 and additional weight gain is a frequent complication of anticancer treatments.718 Obesity is associated with metabolic syndrome, worsening CVRF, and cancer. Increasing evidence indicates that being overweight increases the risk of cancer recurrence and reduces the likelihood of disease-free survival and overall survival among those diagnosed with cancer.719– 724 There is also growing evidence to support intentional weight loss post-treatment in CS, which may result in improved prognosis and survival.719 Dietary patterns characterized by a high intake of vegetables/fruits and whole grains has been shown to be associated with reduced mortality and cancer recurrence when compared with a high intake of refined grains, processed and red meats, and high-fat dairy products.725–727 The identification and treatment of hyperlipidaemia in CS is associated with a profound impact on outcomes.182,183 There is a benefit for CS from an all-cause mortality perspective as well as for decreasing cancer recurrence.728–730 Several studies have demonstrated the therapeutic benefits of exercise during primary anticancer treatment,731,732 and exercise is recommended during and after anticancer treatment.11,733 For CS,734 aerobic exercise results in improved survival.735 Based on current guidelines, patients undergoing anticancer therapy and long-term CS should be encouraged to exercise for at least 150 min per week.736

8.9 Pregnancy in cancer survivors

Improvements in the treatment of cancer have led to an increasing number of female paediatric and adolescent CS who experience pregnancy many years after their oncological treatments. Approximately 60% of them will have been previously exposed to anthracycline chemotherapy or chest RT and they have a 15-fold increase in their lifetime risk of developing HF.737 As young CS enter their reproductive years and contemplate pregnancy, it is important to understand the impact of cancer and its treatment on fertility, pregnancy outcomes, and CV health. There are limited data available regarding CV risk in pregnancy following cancer treatments. The overall incidence of LVD or HF associated with pregnancy in female adult CS varies according to the studied population. In a single institution report including 337 female CS treated with cardiotoxic therapies, 58 (17%) had a subsequent pregnancy.738 Cardiac events, defined as LVEF , 50% on two TTE or new CAD, were identified in 17 patients.738 Patients with cardiac events were likely to be younger at cancer diagnosis, received a higher cumulative dose of anthracycline, and had a longer delay (in years) from cancer treatment to first pregnancy compared with pregnant women with no cardiac event.738 In a recent meta-analysis of six studies, the weighted risk of pregnancy-associated LVD or HF in CS treated with anthracyclines was 1.7% with no reported maternal cardiac deaths.739 Major risk factors for CV events during pregnancy in CS include CTRCD (incidence 28%; 47.4-fold higher odds),739 younger age at cancer diagnosis,738,740 longer time from cancer treatment to first pregnancy, and cumulative anthracycline dose.738

Recommendation Table 45 — Recommendation for adult cancer survivors with pericardial complications

Recommendation Classa Levelb

Patients with acute pericarditis during RT to a volume including the heart are at higher risk of developing chronic constrictive pericarditis, hence echocardiography surveillance every 5 years may be considered. IIb C © ESC 2022

RT, radiotherapy. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

Management by an expert MDT (the pregnancy heart team) is recommended for all CS with CTRCD who are considering pregnancy.739,741,742 The risk of HF in CS without CTRCD is low, although vigilance remains important for potential maternal cardiac complications.

8.10 Pulmonary hypertension

Long-term clinical evaluation may be considered in patients who develop PH during therapy (Section 6). In patients with new exertional dyspnoea, fatigue, or angina, a TTE is recommended to assess the probability of PH. As TTE alone is not enough to confirm the diagnosis of PH, CS diagnosed with high PH probability require a right-heart catheterization to confirm the diagnosis. PH should be treated according to general guidelines with referral to a specialist PH service.620

9 Special populations

9.1 Cardiac tumours

Cardiac tumours are classified as either benign or malignant.743 Over 90% of primary cardiac tumours are benign (myxomas are predominant in adults, rhabdomyomas in children).744 Malignant primary tumours most commonly consist of sarcomas (approximately 65%) or lymphomas (approximately 25%).745 Cardiac metastases (from melanoma, lymphoma, leukaemia, breast, lung, and oesophageal cancers) are much more common than primary cardiac tumours (Figure 39).746 Presenting symptoms are paraneoplastic (fever, weakness, fatigue), thromboembolic, haemodynamic (due to compression or obstruction from the tumour) or arrhythmic.747,748

The diagnostic pathway should be based on knowledge about tumour type epidemiology, imaging features, and usually the requirement for a histopathological diagnosis. This topic has been extensively reviewed in ESC CardioMed,749 and here we summarize the main recommendations for differential diagnosis and management. Differential diagnosis should exclude cardiac thrombi or the presence of chemotherapy catheters. Imaging must assess the possibilities of cardiac surgery, and may include: (1) echocardiography (initial approach using TTE or transoesophageal echocardiography)748,750; (2) CMR (for cardiac tumour tissue characterization)751,752; and (3) CT and PET (to distinguish malignant from benign lesions and assess for non-cardiac metastatic disease or primary cancers) (Figure 40).753,754 Myxomas are primarily treated with surgery with a good prognosis. Malignant tumours are associated with a poor prognosis and evidence of the best treatment is lacking. Complete surgical resection is often impossible and adjuvant RT, systemic chemotherapy, and/or debulking palliative surgery are needed.755 Cardiac aggressive B-cell lymphomas require histopathological diagnosis (often obtained via analysis of pericardial effusion, EMB, or direct surgical biopsy) and are treated with chemotherapy, possibly followed by RT (Table 13).756

9.2 Pregnant patients with cancer

The diagnosis of cancer during pregnancy is uncommon (1 in every 1000 pregnant women is diagnosed with cancer), with BC, melanoma, and cervical cancer being the most frequent diagnoses.757 Chemotherapy is generally not applied during the first trimester due to the high risk of foetal congenital abnormalities (up to 20%) and cytotoxic chemotherapies have different risk profiles during the second or third trimesters.758,759 Furthermore, chemotherapy administration is usually not given beyond week 34 of gestation to provide a 3-week window between the last cycle and delivery.757 Supplementary data, Table S19 summarizes the chemotherapies for pregnant patients with cancer.760,761 Cardiac assessment prior to chemotherapy in pregnant women with cancer should consist of clinical history, physical examination, ECG, cardiac biomarker assessment and TTE (Figure 41).741 Baseline and follow-up TTE should be interpreted in the context of physiological haemodynamic alterations during pregnancy. In normal pregnancy, increase in stroke volume, heart rate, and pre-load blood volume, and decrease in systemic vascular resistance, lead to an increase in cardiac output from the first trimester to 80–85% above baseline by the third trimester.762–764 An increase in LV mass and LV and RV volumes is observed in the third trimester. During normal pregnancy, LVEF is usually unchanged and can be used for CTRCD monitoring. Although NP and cTn may be slightly elevated during normal pregnancy (NT-proBNP , 300 ng/L, BNP , 100 pg/mL,14 and hs-cTnT765,766), serial evaluation may be useful for

Recommendation Table 46 — Recommendations for cardiovascular monitoring in cancer survivors during pregnancy

Recommendations Classa Levelb

In high-risk female CS, pre-pregnancy counselling and management during pregnancy and around delivery by a multidisciplinary pregnancy heart team is recommended. I C A baseline CV evaluation including history, physical examination, ECG, NP, and echocardiography is recommended in female CS with a history of CTRCD who are considering pregnancy. I C A baseline CV evaluation including history, physical examination, ECG, and echocardiography should be considered in all female CS who received potentially cardiotoxic cancer therapy and are considering pregnancy. IIa C A CV evaluation including echocardiography is recommended at 12 weeks of pregnancy in female CS who are either high-risk or who received potentially cardiotoxic cancer therapy and did not have a baseline CV assessment. I C A second CV evaluation including echocardiography should be considered at 20 weeks of pregnancy in high-risk female CSc who received potentially cardiotoxic cancer therapy. IIa C © ESC 2022

CS, cancer survivors; CTRCD, cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction; CV, cardiovascular; ECG, electrocardiogram, NP, natriuretic peptides. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cSee Tables 11 and 12. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

close CTRCD monitoring during cancer treatment with the higher cut-off NP levels for pregnancy. The topic of CVD during pregnancy has been extensively reviewed in the 2018 ESC Guidelines for the management of CVD during pregnancy.741 Here we focus on specific recommendations in pregnant women with cancer receiving anthracycline chemotherapy.

9.2.1 Left ventricular dysfunction and heart failure

Medical history evaluating signs and symptoms of HF should be performed at every clinical visit of pregnant women with cancer receiving anthracycline chemotherapy. More frequent CV evaluations with TTE during treatments with potential CTRCD risk should be advised (e.g. every 4–8 weeks or every two cycles for a 3-weekly anthracycline chemotherapy cycle). The management of clinical HF or asymptomatic LVD during pregnancy is fully described in the 2018 ESC Guidelines for the management of CVD during pregnancy.741

9.2.2 Venous thromboembolism and pulmonary

embolism Pregnant patients with cancer have an increased risk of developing VTE, especially when hospitalized.767–769 Identified risks for VTE in pregnant patients include having a history of BC or previous chemotherapy in the past 6 months.

Lipoma Metastasis Myxoma Sarcoma

Left atrium

Lung tumours Sarcoma

Pulmonary veins

Fibroelastoma Metastasis

Valves

Left ventricle

Fibroma Lipoma Lymphoma Metastasis Rhabdomyoma Sarcoma

Leiomyoma Renal tumour

Inferior cava vein

Right atrium

Lipoma Lymphoma Metastasis Myxoma Sarcoma

Right ventricle

Fibroma Lipoma Lymphoma Metastasis Rhabdomyoma

Pericardium

Lipo-sarcoma Lipoma Lymphoma Mesothelioma Metastasis

Sarcoma

Pulmonary artery

Figure 39 Location of primary and secondary cardiac tumours. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

CTb Echocardiographya PETd CMRc

Secondary tumour

(metastasis)f Benign primary

tumour Malignant primary

tumour

Diagnostic algorithm for cardiac masses

Non-invasive assessment of single or multiple cardiac masses

Tumour

Type Thrombus, vegetation, structural

Consider cardiac mass biopsy if malignant primary tumour suspected or diagnosis uncertain on imaginge

Lymphoma Sarcoma Angioma, lipoma, papillary fibroelastoma Myxoma

Leukaemias Lymphomas Melanomas Solid tumours: breast, lung, and oesophageal cancers

Figure 40 Diagnostic algorithm for cardiac masses. CMR, cardiac magnetic resonance; CT, computed tomography; PET, positron emission tomography; TTE, transthoracic echocardiography. aTTE/transoesophageal echocardiography: location, size, and haemodynamic disturbances. Contrast echocardiography to assess vascularization. bIdentify primary extra-cardiac malignancy. Reveal extra-cardiac changes. Staging of malignant lesions. cTissue characterization (fat infiltration, necrosis, haemorrhage, calcification, and vascularization). Exclude thrombus. dDistinguish malignant vs. benign lesions. Staging of malignant lesions. eMass biopsy of suspected primary malignant cardiac tumours and/or biopsy of extracardiac masses if detected and safer to biopsy. f20–30 times more likely than primary tumours.

Table 13 Management strategies and surgery indications for symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with benign and malignant cardiac tumours

Classification Management strategies Surgery indications

Benign tumours Asymptomatic MDT discussion is required considering: tumour type, location, size, growth rate, and likelihood of embolism.

Anticoagulation should be considered for left-sided tumours or right-sided tumours associated with an intracardiac shunt, according to the individual’s embolic and bleeding risk If left-sided and endocardial: even if small and incidental, a MDT is needed to consider the indication for surgical

removal due to the embolic risk

Symptomatic Non-surgical management for:

• Rhabdomyomas (possible spontaneous regression) • Intramural haemangioma (possible response to corticosteroids) • Unresectable cases: if antiarrhythmic therapy is sufficient Surgical resection is indicated in all other cases.

For large, benign, unresectable, symptomatic cardiac tumours (obstruction, severe HF, or malignant arrhythmias), heart transplantation may be indicated in some cases

Malignant tumours Asymptomatic Histopathological diagnosis is required If primary cardiac sarcoma, a complete surgical resection

may increase survival

Symptomatic Chemotherapy and/or RT are the only therapeutic options

for secondary cardiac tumours. If primary cardiac lymphoma: chemotherapy Secondary cardiac tumours may also be treated with

palliative cardiac surgery © ESC 2022

HF, heart failure; MDT, multidisciplinary team; RT, radiotherapy. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

Recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of PE during pregnancy are the same as in the general 2018 ESC Guidelines for the management of CVD during pregnancy741 and 2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism.566 Determination of VTE risk score and the use of thromboprophylaxis protocols may be useful to prevent maternal morbidity and/or mortality due to VTE.770 LMWH have become the drug of choice for the prophylaxis and treatment of VTE in pregnant patients.741 The recommendation for thromboprophylaxis should be individualized, weighing the risks of bleeding vs. thromboembolism in pregnant patients with cancer.

1st trimester Follow-up Anthracycline chemotherapy

1st trimester Anthracycline chemotherapy Follow-up

ECG

TTE

Physical examination Baseline Week

12 Week

20

Every visit Every 4–8 W Week

34 Delivery 12 M

Cardiac monitoring protocol for pregnant women receiving

anthracycline-based chemotherapy

ECG

cTn/NP

Class 1 Class 1Ia Class 1Ib

Figure 41 Cardiac monitoring protocol for pregnant women receiving anthracycline-based chemotherapy. cTn, cardiac troponin; ECG, electrocardiogram; M, months; NP, natriuretic peptides; TTE, transoesophageal echocardiography; W, week. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

9.3 Carcinoid valvular heart disease

Carcinoid tumours represent rare neuroendocrine malignancies originating from the enterochromaffin cells (Figure 42).771 Carcinoid syndrome is a rare cause of acquired VHD including mainly rightsided valvular lesions, but also left-sided involvement, pericardial effusion, and myocardial metastases.772 Coronary artery vasospasm and paroxysmal atrial or ventricular tachycardias may rarely occur due to sympathetic stimulation. Cardiac metastases are reported with an incidence of 3.8% on the ventricles, confirmed by PET-CT scans.773,774 Data from the SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results) registry identified that approximately 20% of patients with neuroendocrine malignancies develop carcinoid syndrome (7.6–32.4%), which is associated with shorter survival (4.7 years compared with 7.1 years in patients without carcinoid syndrome) and poor quality of life.775 It is estimated that 20–50% of these patients present cardiac involvement, especially of the right-sided cardiac valves.771 In the presence of a patent foramen ovale, interatrial shunt, primary bronchial neuroendocrine tumour, or extensive liver metastases, humoral substances directly enter the systemic circulation, causing left-sided valvular involvement in up to one-third of cases.776 NP should be considered for screening and surveillance of patients at risk of carcinoid cardiac involvement and TTE is recommended in patients with NT-proBNP . 260 pg/mL or clinical signs or symptoms.777–780 In asymptomatic patients with NT-proBNP , 260 pg/ mL, repeat clinical and NP assessment should be considered every 6 months. Survival has improved in carcinoid tumours, with the use of somatostatin analogues and surgical techniques in liver metastasis. However, right HF still represents a major cause of death.781,782 Many patients with severe tricuspid regurgitation due to carcinoid syndrome require both tricuspid and pulmonary valve surgery.783

Administration of i.v. somatostatin analogues (e.g. octreotide) is recommended to avoid a peri-operative carcinoid crisis. The infusion should be started on the morning of the procedure (up to 12 h preoperatively), continued throughout the procedure (surgery, preoperative coronary angiography, pacemaker implantation), and postoperatively for at least 48 h following valve surgery or until stable if a carcinoid crisis is triggered post-operatively.772 The optimal choice of valve prosthesis is still a matter of debate due to the balance of risk of both accelerated bioprosthetic valve degeneration vs. bleeding risks in patients with extensive liver metastases requiring therapeutic anticoagulation for mechanical valves.784,785 Complications include AV block, requiring pacemaker implantation in 25% of patients.786 Frequently, the reduced RV function does not improve despite tricuspid valve replacement and HF persists.787 Thrombus formation on the tricuspid bioprosthesis can occur, especially during the first 3 months post-operatively, and oral anticoagulation with VKA may be considered. Persistent serotonin elevation can cause recurrent bioprosthesis valve fibrosis. Valve-in-valve transcatheter intervention has been reported in bioprosthetic valve failure in metastatic carcinoid heart disease; however, future research is needed to define its role.783,788,789 In patients with left-sided carcinoid valvular involvement, closure of interatrial shunts should be considered, although only sparse data exist for this approach.

Recommendation Table 47 — Recommendations for cardiovascular assessment and monitoring of pregnant women with cancer

Recommendations Classa Levelb

Management by an expert MDT (the pregnancy heart team) in an expert centre is recommended for pregnant women with cancer who require cardiotoxic cancer therapy.741 I C Cardiac assessment prior to cardiotoxic cancer therapy in pregnant women is recommended and consists of clinical history, physical examination, ECG, and echocardiography.741 I C Monthly or bimonthly CV evaluation, including TTE, should be considered during cardiotoxic cancer therapyc in pregnant women with cancer. IIa C cTn may be considered at baseline and during anthracycline chemotherapy in pregnant women with cancer. IIb C © ESC 2022

cTn, cardiac troponin; CV, cardiovascular; ECG, electrocardiogram; MDT, multidisciplinary team; TTE, transthoracic echocardiography. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cFor patients receiving anthracycline-based chemotherapy.

Recommendation Table 48 — Recommendations for carcinoid valvular heart diseases

Recommendations Classa Levelb Echocardiographyc is recommended for the detection of carcinoid cardiac involvement in all patients with carcinoid syndrome and elevated NP levels and/or clinical signs of carcinoid heart disease, and for surveillance every 3 or 6 months depending on the severity of cardiac involvement and clinical status.772,790,791 I B NP should be considered for screening and surveillance of carcinoid heart disease every 6 months.777–780 IIa B A MDT discussion for optimal medial management to prevent carcinoid crisis is recommended before any invasive or surgical cardiac procedure. I C Valve replacement surgery is recommended in symptomatic patients with severe carcinoid tricuspid or pulmonary VHD and an expected survival ≥12 months.d,783,785 I C Valve replacement surgery should be considered in patients with asymptomatic severe carcinoid tricuspid or pulmonary VHD, progressive RV dysfunction/dilatation, and an expected survival ≥12 months.d,772 IIa C

Continued Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

9.4 Amyloid light-chain cardiac

amyloidosis Amyloid light-chain amyloidosis is a plasma cell dyscrasia, which is typically treated with therapies very similar to those used in MM, including PI-based therapy.792 It can occur in conjunction with myeloma or independently as a light-chain proteinproducing disorder. Amyloid light-chain amyloidosis is a systemic disease 793,794 and it is critical to have a high degree of suspicion for the diagnosis of cardiac involvement (amyloid light-chain cardiac amyloidosis [AL-CA]) because a combination of specialized tests is needed to make an accurate diagnosis (Figure 43).290,793,795,796

Valve replacement or repair surgery is recommended in symptomatic patients with severe carcinoid mitral or aortic VHD and an expected survival ≥12 months.783,785 I C © ESC 2022

MDT, multidisciplinary team; NP, natriuretic peptides; RV, right ventricular; VHD, valvular heart disease. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cIncluding saline contrast infusion at baseline to rule out patent foramen ovale. dWith controlled serotonin concentrations.

Flushing

Bronchoconstriction

Diarrhoea

Ascites

Peripheral oedema

Pleural effusion Carcinoid heart disease: clinical featuresand diagnostic tests

Clinical features Diagnostic and pronostic tools

TTE

Circulating serotonin

NP

Urinary 5HIAA

CMR

Figure 42 Carcinoid heart disease: clinical features and diagnostic tests. 5HIAA, 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid; CMR, cardiac magnetic resonance; NP, natriuretic peptides; TTE, transthoracic echocardiography. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

Proteinuria Renal impairment

Kidney

CV

Dyspnoea

Peripheral oedema

AF/flutter

HFpEF or unexplained right HF Hypotension or syncope

Nerves

Orthostatic hypotension Peripheral polyneuropathy Polyneuropathy

GI

Constipation /diarrhoea Macroglossia Malabsorption/weight loss/nausea

Bruising Skin

Laboratorya

ECGb

TTEc

Characteristic echo findingse

ECHO score ≥8d

CMRf

Non-invasive diagnosis of AL-CA

Clinical features Investigations

Figure 43 Non-invasive diagnosis of amyloid light-chain cardiac amyloidosis. a′, late diastolic velocity of mitral annulus obtained by tissue Doppler imaging; AF, atrial fibrillation; AL-CA, amyloid light-chain cardiac amyloidosis; CMR, cardiac magnetic resonance; CV, cardiovascular; E, mitral inflow early diastolic velocity obtained by pulsed wave; e′, early diastolic velocity of mitral annulus obtained by tissue doppler imaging; ECG, electrocardiogram; echo, echocardiography; ECV, extracellular volume fraction; GI, gastrointestinal; GLS, global longitudinal strain; HF, heart failure; HFpEF, heart failure with preserved ejection fraction; IVS, interventricular septum; LGE, late gadolinium enhancement; LV, left ventricular; LVEDD, left ventricular end diastolic diameter; NT-proBNP, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide; PW, left ventricular posterior wall; s′, systolic velocity of tricuspid annulus obtained by Doppler tissue imaging; SPEP, serum protein electrophoresis; TAPSE, tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion; TTE, transthoracic echocardiography; UPEP, urine protein electrophoresis. Individually, the clinical manifestations and findings on cardiac testing for AL-CA are non-specific. Integration of all clinical and diagnostic findings is necessary when assessing the likelihood of the diagnosis. aDisproportionately high NT-proBNP; persisting elevated troponin levels; abnormal free light-chain levels (AL-CA); positive SPEP and/or UPEP (AL-CA). bDisproportionally low QRS voltage; early conduction system disease; pseudo-infarct pattern. cUnexplained LV thickness ≥12 mm + 1 or 2 characteristic echo findings or ECHO score ≥8; idiopathic pericardial effusion. dECHO score: relative LV wall thickness (IVS + PW/LVEDD) . 0.6 (3 points), Doppler E/e′ . 11 (1 point); TAPSE ≤19 mm (2 points); GLS ≥−13% (1 point); systolic longitudinal strain apex to base ratio.2.9 (3 points). eCharacteristic echocardiography findings: grade ≥2 diastolic dysfunction; reduced s′, e′, and a′ velocities (,5 cm/s); decreased GLS to ≥−15%. fDiffuse subendocardial or transmural LGE; elevated native T1 values; abnormal gadolinium kinetics (myocardial nulling preceding or coinciding with the blood pool); ECV ≥0.40% (strongly supportive). Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

Cardiac serum biomarkers are an essential step in the diagnostic and prognostic assessments for these patients.797–799 AL-CA has been extensively reviewed in a recent position paper from the Working Group on Myocardial and Pericardial Diseases.290 The classical non-invasive definition of AL-CA is based on clinical suspicion, biomarkers, TTE, CMR, and nuclear scintigraphy criteria (Figure 43). Persistent troponin elevation and disproportionately high NT-proBNP (generally .300 ng/L in the absence of renal failure or AF) to ventricular function parameters on TTE is a characteristic red flag for AL-CA.800 A decrease in GLS with a distinctive apical sparing pattern (preserved GLS values in the LV apical region) is considered specific for cardiac amyloidosis, although it is not helpful to distinguish between amyloid light-chain and transthyretin amyloidosis.801 Additionally, GLS ≥−15% may serve as an independent prognostic factor of poor overall survival in patients with AL-CA.802 CMR with LGE and parametric imaging has emerged as a new non-invasive gold-standard for diagnosis (Figure 43).803,804 Nuclear scintigraphy can differentiate transthyretin amyloidosis from AL-CA supported by the presence of monoclonal protein.290 EMB should be considered in patients with suspected AL-CA involvement if CMR is not diagnostic.290 A rare condition that may coexist with AL-CA is light-chain deposition disease, which frequently associates extensive renal involvement and poor prognosis.799 Recently, a staging system for AL-CA has demonstrated the prognostic impact of cTnT and NT-proBNP levels.797 Heart progression criteria are defined by NT-proBNP progression (.30% and .300 ng/L increase), cTnT progression (≥33% increase) or ejection fraction decrease (≥10% decrease).805–807 However, evaluating a cardiac response to treatment using a decrease in NT-proBNP levels and New York Heart Association class improvement is still challenging. AL-CA frequently results in HF, major cardiac arrhythmias, orthostatic hypotension, sudden cardiac death, and an increased risk of arterial and venous thrombosis.808–810 Beta-blockers, ACE-I, ARB, or angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor may not be well tolerated because of hypotension.290 The management of AF is very complex in this population. Amiodarone is the preferred antiarrhythmic treatment and digitalis should be used with caution. Anticoagulation is recommended in all AL-CA patients with AF independent of the CHA2DS2-VASc score due to the high prothrombotic risk unless there is a contraindication.290 Currently, the guidelines for implanted devices, including pacemakers and ICDs, do not provide specific recommendations for AL-CA and decisions should be individualized after a MDT discussion.811 Optimal systemic therapy for AL-CA is rapidly changing, and the efficacy of certain combination therapies continues to improve.812,813 Autologous HSCT for AL-CA is not universally utilized but is a viable treatment option.814 Therapies for AL-CA are evolving, and daratumumab and PI show promise for improved outcomes.792,815–817 Clinical observations, but no RCT evidence, suggest the potential role of doxycycline to improve survival in patients with AL-CA.818,819 9.5 Cardiac implantable electronic

devices RT can cause malfunction of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs).443,823 The risk of RT-induced CIED malfunction generally increases with the radiation dose,824,825 although the strongest predictor of malfunction is the magnitude of exposure to neutron emission from high-energy photon RT, conventionally defined as a beam energy .10 megavolts (MV).824,826,827 Non-neutron-producing treatment is therefore preferable in patients with a CIED.826 RT-induced CIED malfunction can manifest in: (1) transient interference, with inappropriate triggering during the irradiation only; (2) a reset, reverting to backup settings, recoverable with device reprogramming; and, rarely (3) permanent damage to the device due to direct CIED irradiation.826,827 The clinical consequences of a CIED malfunction include the inhibition of pacing and inappropriate pacing at maximum sensor rate.826 The clinical effects of device malfunction are greatest when the patient is pacing-dependent. Theoretically, oversensing might lead to inappropriate ICD shocks, although this has not been reported in the literature.826 More recent registries have reported minimal or no adverse effects of RT on CIED malfunction.827,828 Nevertheless, as it is not possible to predict the behaviour of a CIED within or close to an RT treatment volume, general recommendations should be followed to minimize patient risk (Figures 44–46).188,824,825 Patients with a CIED should be reviewed by their cardiologist/ electrophysiologist to assess the risk of CIED malfunction and

Recommendation Table 49 — Recommendations for amyloid light-chain cardiac amyloidosis diagnosis and monitoring

Recommendations Classa Levelb

Echocardiography, NP, and cTn are recommended for the diagnosis of AL-CA in patients with plasma cell dyscrasia.290,820–822 I B CMR is recommended in patients with suspected AL-CA.290,803,804 I A EMB should be considered in patients with suspected AL-CA involvement if CMR is not diagnostic.290 IIa C Admission with inpatient ECG monitoring should be considered for high-risk patients with AL-CA requiring PI during their first cycle of therapy.c,808,811 IIa C © ESC 2022

AL-CA, amyloid light-chain cardiac amyloidosis; CMR, cardiac magnetic resonance; cTn, cardiac troponin; ECG, electrocardiogram; EMB, endomyocardial biopsy; HFA, Heart Failure Association; ICOS, International Cardio-Oncology Society; NP, natriuretic peptides; PI, proteasome inhibitors. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. cAccording to baseline evaluation using HFA-ICOS PI risk assessment tools (see Section 4). Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

patients should be informed of the potential risks of RT.443 For patients with rate-adaptive pacemakers, consideration should be given to temporary deactivation of the sensor during RT. Although inactivation of antitachycardia therapies in patients with ICDs is recommended in several publications, by either reprogramming or application of a magnet to ICDs, it is infrequently performed in clinical practice.826 CIEDs should not be placed directly in the RT treatment volume and the cumulative dose should not exceed 2 Gy to a pacemaker or 1 Gy to an ICD.827 If the CIED is situated in the path of the planned radiation beam, it could also interfere with adequate tumour treatment. The photon beam energy should be kept ,10 MV as the risk of device malfunction/damage increases above this threshold. If higher doses are needed or if the CIED cannot be kept out of the beam, consideration should be given to removing and relocating the CIED away from the beam, although this will only very rarely be necessary. The main reason for device relocation is to allow adequate RT treatment of the tumour, but consideration should also be given to possible RT-induced CIED malfunction/damage with consequent need for CIED replacement.826 However, CIED explant and resiting carries significant risks, including the risk of infection, which may be of

Pacingdependent or

frequent ICD

therapies

Pacingindependent

<5 Gy

≥5 Gy

<10 Gy or neutrons <10 MV

≥10 Gy or neutrons ≥10 MV

Patient Assessing risk of RT to CIED

Dose region

and risk category

Low risk High risk

Medium risk

CIED in the RT

treatment

volume

YES

NO

Risk areas

Figure 44 Risk stratification in patients with a cardiac implantable electronic device undergoing radiotherapy. CIED, cardiac implantable electronic device; Gy, Gray; ICD, implantable cardioverter defibrillator; MV, megavolt; RT, radiotherapy. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

particular importance in patients receiving chemotherapy or those who are immunosuppressed. For most patients in whom definitive tumour treatment is planned, the risk/benefit ratio will usually favour device relocation, whereas for patients receiving palliative RT or with significant comorbidities, relocation could be avoided.826 These decisions should be made by a MDT in conjunction with the patient. Device relocation is not recommended for CIEDs receiving a maximum cumulative incident dose of ,5 Gy, where the risk is considered negligible.826,828

There should be continuous visual and voice contact with the patient during each treatment fraction. CIEDs should be periodically checked in patients with ICDs, especially those receiving .10 MV

OR

Consider moving CIED

CIED evaluation:

Leave device in situ

CIED evaluation:

f o f f r e R T

R R b ECG and/or pulse o ximet r y monitoring and external pacing a vailable

a a

during R T sessions

R R W eek W W l y during R T

R R

Reduce radiation ener g

r y to minimize exposu r e to neut r ons

Limit cu m ulati v e dose

Be f o

f f r e R T

R R b (Class I)

Audio-visual monitoring

o w-risk patients High-risk patients

CIED in the R T t

R R r eatment v olume

MDT a Consider R T type and dose

R R (Figu r e 46)

CIED check-up after completing R T

R R

(Class I)

Pacing dependent or f r equent ICD ther a pies

Maxi m um cu m ulati v e incident dose of >5 Gy

(Class I)

N N N

Risk stratification of patients with CIED under g

r oing thoracic R T

R R

Y Y

Y

Figure 45 Management of patients with a cardiac implantable electronic device located in the radiotherapy treatment beam. CIED, cardiac implantable electronic device; ECG, electrocardiogram; Gy, Gray; ICD, implantable cardioverter defibrillator; MDT, multidisciplinary team; N, no; RT, radiotherapy; Y, yes. aMultidisciplinary discussion must consider: (1) whether the CIED is interfering with the RT dose delivered to the tumour; (2) whether the RT is interfering with CIED function (aim to not exceed 2 Gy to permanent pacemaker and 1 Gy to ICD); (3) risks of moving the CIED: infection (especially in immunocompromised patients), procedural complications (e.g. bleeding with thrombocytopaenia); for younger patients with good prognosis, consider long-term effects of losing an access site (lead extraction/RT-induced thrombosis). bIf last CIED check .3 months earlier. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

photon beam energy.827,829 For patients receiving electron or kV photon beam RT, CIED evaluation appears largely unnecessary.827 For patients treated with proton beam RT, special consideration should be paid to the neutron component of the beam, as the risk of CIED reset is potentially significant.824,830 The CIED should be rechecked within 2 weeks of completion of RT treatment. Systematic remote CIED monitoring may be helpful to optimize the patient’s surveillance.831

L o w-risk patient s High-risk patients

L o w-risk patient s High-risk patients High-risk patients

R T type and dose R R

Pacing-dependent

CIED evaluation: CIED evaluation: CIED evaluation: CIED evaluation: Be f o

f f r e R T

R R a (Class I)

Audio-visual monitoring Be f o

f f r e R T

R R a

W eek W W l y during R T

R R

ECG and/or pulse o ximet r y monitoring and external pacing a vailable

a a

during R T sessions

R R Be f o

f f r e R T

R R a

W eek W W l y during R T

R R

ECG and/or pulse o ximet r y monitoring and external pacing a vailable

a a

during R T sessions

R R

Be f o

f f r e R T

R R a (Class I)

Audio-visual monitoring

CIED check-up after completing radiother a p y

p

(Class I)

(Class I) (Class I)

Pacing-dependent or f r equent ICD ther a pies

Neut r on-generating R T

R R

or dose ≥ 2 Gy

<10 MV photons or

2–9 Gy ≥ 10 MV photons or

≥ 10 Gy

Non-neut r on-generating R T

R R

or dose <2 Gy

Management of patients with CIED located outside the R T t

R R r eatment v olume

N N

Y Y

Figure 46 Management of patients with a cardiac implantable electronic device located outside the radiotherapy treatment volume. CIED, cardiac implantable electronic device; ECG, electrocardiogram; Gy, Gray; ICD, implantable cardioverter defibrillator; MV, megavolt; N, no; RT, radiotherapy; Y, yes. aIf last CIED check .3 months earlier. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

10. Patient information, communication, and self-management

Collaboration between different healthcare professionals and patients is of paramount importance for the most effective management of patients with cancer and CVD. Appropriate language and communication should be used to allow patients to receive clear and accurate information about their condition, and play an active role in managing their treatment.11 The first goal of this process is to raise the patient’s awareness of the possible presence or development of a CVD, either during cancer or after having some oncological therapy. Patients should understand that cancer and CVD share many CVRF and reducing risk is vital for the prevention of cancer, cancer relapse, and the development or worsening of a CVD during or after treatment. Patients should be informed—at the end of chemotherapy—that a personalized follow-up plan and regular CV controls are needed to detect potential reversible stages of CV toxicities. Education, counselling, and support to promote healthy lifestyle and to treat modifiable

Recommendation Table 50 — Recommendations for riskstratificationandmonitoringforpatientswithcardiac implantable electronic devices undergoing radiotherapy

Recommendations Classa Levelb

Risk stratification including planned radiation type and energy, dose to CIED, the patient’s device type, and pacing dependence is recommended prior to starting treatment.824,825,827,828 I C In patients undergoing RT, a CIED check is recommended in all patients before and after completing RT, and during RT according to individual risk.824,826 I C In patients with a CIED undergoing RT at high risk of arrhythmia and/or device dysfunction, ECG monitoring and/or pulse oximetry are recommended during every RT session.827,829,831 I C © ESC 2022

CIED, cardiac implantable electronic device; ECG, electrocardiogram; RT, radiotherapy. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence.

Interaction between healthcare professionals and patients with cancer

Information

Raise awareness of possible CVD

with cancer

Understand shared risk factors for cancer and CVD Appropriate lifestyle

modification

Active treatment

of CVRF Recognition and report of early CV symptoms and signs

Regular CV follow-up (also if asymptomatic) Don’t stop cardioprotective therapy

without medical advice

Timely EoL and DNR discussion

Education, counselling, and support

Consider specific psychologic and social conditions

Aid of digital health tools or information leaflets

Appropriate language and communication

Figure 47 Patient information, communication, and self-management. CV, cardiovascular; CVD, cardiovascular disease; CVRF, cardiovascular risk factors; DNR, do not resuscitate; EoL, end of life. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

CVRF should be offered to patients with cancer, in order to reduce the burden of complications during and after anticancer therapy. Patients should receive guidance to recognize and to report signs and symptoms of CVD, in order to receive prompt and effective treatment, ideally without interfering with their cancer treatment. Patients should also be advised not to stop cardioprotective therapies without medical guidance, even if they recover their cardiac function. To help in this complex task, leaflets specifically designed for this context may be used,832,833 eventually with the aid of digital tools (Figure 47).

11 The role of scientific societies

in the promotion and development of cardio-oncology in modern medicine

Cardio-oncology is a subspecialty that has seen huge development and growth in recent years with the formation—in almost all national and international societies—of cardio-oncology working groups. Moreover, cancer and medical associations have also developed an increasing interest in cardio-oncology. Important roles of these scientific societies are clinical research, education, and advocacy. The ESC-CCO strategic plan and mission include improvement of prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and management of CTR-CVT and enhancement of the standard of care for patients with cancer (Figure 48).

12 Key messages

This is the first ESC cardio-oncology Guideline and contains 272 new recommendations. The key messages from this guideline are: • A guiding principle of cardio-oncology is integration, and cardio-oncology providers must have knowledge of the broad scope of cardiology, oncology, and haematology. Communication between different healthcare professionals is critical to optimize the care of patients with cancer and CVD. • Cardio-oncology programmes facilitate cancer treatment by minimizing unnecessary cancer therapy interruptions and CTR-CVT

The role of scientific societies in the promotion and

development of cardio-oncology

Cardiooncology Advocacy

Research

Education

Engagement

Basic and translational research Clinical research Long-term survivorship programmes Appropriate resources Communication Knowledge Organization

Community level International level National level Regional level

Political strategies against cancer and CVD

Community Healthcare authorities Healthcare professionals Patients

Communication

strategies

Figure 48 The role of scientific societies in the promotion and development of cardio-oncology. CVD, cardiovascular disease. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

across the entire continuum of cancer care. In patients who develop CTR-CVT, a MDT discussion is required to balance the risk/benefit of cancer treatment discontinuation. • There is a new international definition of CTR-CVT (Table 3). • CV toxicity risk is a dynamic variable. This guideline is structured to provide a personalized approach to care based upon the baseline CV toxicity risk. A baseline CV risk assessment is recommended for all patients with cancer scheduled to receive a potentially cardiotoxic anticancer therapy. This enables the oncology team to consider CV risk while making cancer treatment choices, educating patients regarding their CV risk, and personalizing CV surveillance and follow-up strategy. • Primary prevention of CV toxicity from cancer therapy aims to avoid or minimize the development of CTR-CVT in patients without CVD. • Secondary prevention refers to interventions in patients with preexisting CVD, including prior or new CTR-CVT. A MDT is recommended when patients with cancer have complex CVD that may impact on their cancer treatment. • Defining and delivering an appropriate prevention and surveillance plan for potential CV complications is recommended. Optimal management of CVRF and pre-existing CVD is mandatory to facilitate cancer therapy and to improve patients’ prognosis. • Detailed monitoring pathways during cancer therapy—including 3D echocardiography, GLS, and cardiac biomarkers—are provided to detect CV toxicity based upon specific cancer therapies and baseline CV toxicity risk. • Treatment recommendations for CTRCD during and after cancer therapy depend upon CTRCD severity and symptoms. New guidance on continuing trastuzumab in BC patients who develop asymptomatic moderate CTRCD (LVEF 40–49%) while starting cardioprotective medication is provided. • Use of a structured algorithm to guide decisions regarding anticoagulation management in patients with cancer presenting with AF or VTE encompassing the TBIP assessment is encouraged. • After cancer treatment is completed, the focus of the cardio-oncology team shifts to coordination of long-term followup. This starts with an ‘end-of-treatment’ assessment in the first year after treatment, reviewing patients with cancer who have received cardiotoxic anticancer therapies to reassess their CV toxicity risk and guide long-term surveillance planning. • A new algorithm (Figure 37) is provided to guide weaning off of CV medication in CS. • Patients with cancer, CS, and the patient’s family/carers should receive guidance to promote healthy lifestyle and recognize and report signs and symptoms of CVD, to receive prompt and effective treatment, without interfering with their cancer treatment. • Patients must receive psychological support when needed and clear and accurate information about their condition to play an active role in managing their treatment and increase adherence to cancer and CV treatments.

13 Future needs

There are a low number of dedicated cardio-oncology services and most patients are reviewed in general cardiology clinics in Europe and worldwide. Strategic investments in cardio-oncology care networks and cardio-oncology services provision are needed to meet the projected increased clinical demand in the near future,834 and to facilitate research, training, and educational activities. A dedicated training core curriculum for a minimum of 1-year medical training is urgently needed. It may include: (1) knowledge of the broad scope of cardiology, oncology, and haematology; (2) CV competencies for CTR-CVT prevention, surveillance, and management of patients with cancer in dedicated outpatients’ cardio-oncology clinics; (3) inpatient consultative services; and (4) dedicated time to achieve competences in CV imaging, HF, and vascular cardiology.

Collaboration between healthcare providers, clinical and basic investigators, healthcare authorities, regulatory bodies, advocacy groups, and patients’ associations is needed to address future needs (see Section 11). As this Guideline was developed, it became clear that there is a significant lack of RCT to guide decision-making, with many recommendations supported by level of evidence C. This is complicated by the fast-moving pace of new oncology treatment developments against a background of dynamic CV toxicity likelihood. Therefore, large numbers of patients and longer follow-up are required to provide sufficient statistical power and definitive answers. In the future, the following strategies and areas of research are priorities:

• New trial designs focusing upon the ‘at-risk’ cancer patient populations. • Validating current HFA-ICOS risk assessment tools and surveillance algorithms. • Assessment of new technologies for the detection of early CTRCD, broadening the biomarker panel and recognizing the specific patterns in early myocardial damage. • Refining CV risk scores (e.g. EuroSCORE II, SCORE2, SCORE2-OP, CHA2DS2-VASc, HAS-BLED, SYNTAX) for application in cancer populations. • Optimal treatment of steroid-resistant ICI CV toxicity and longterm CV effects of ICI therapy. • Selection criteria for modern percutaneous structural (TAVI, Mitraclip, LAA occluder devices) and electrophysiological (ablation) CV therapies in patients with active cancer. • Patient-specific predictive algorithms for QTc prolongation with cancer drugs. • Assessment of genetic profiles in more specific CTRCD risk prediction. • Identification of the cancer patient populations with mild or moderate CTRCD during treatment who can safely wean off long-term CV medication. • Optimal modalities for screening long-term survivor populations for the complications of anthracycline chemotherapy and mediastinal radiation. • Creation of large cardio-oncology registries to collect ‘big data’ on large patient populations. • Application of artificial intelligence and other new data analytics to identify new patients with cancer at risk and new parameters that can predict risk of CTR-CVT, response to specific cardioprotective interventions, and long-term risk and safety to wean off CV therapies initiated during cancer treatment. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

14 Gaps in evidence

Cancer and CVD are the two major public health problems with great economic and social impact. In addition, CTR-CVT are associated with anexcessofbothCVandoncologicalmortality,especiallywhenthey limit patients’ ability to complete effective treatments. However, the intersection of cancer and CVD has only recently gained wider interest and many areas with lack of evidence need to be addressed in future research.

Role of cardio-oncology services and cardio-oncology care networks • Robust evidence on the impact of dedicated cardio-oncology programmes and cardio-oncology rehabilitation on the prognosis of patients with cancer and survivors. • Specification of roles of different healthcare professionals (including nurses and pharmacists) in cardio-oncology teams. • Cardio-oncology care networks to improve the management of patients with cancer and to discuss difficult cases. • Cardio-oncology team support and involvement in oncology trials design (including patients’ representatives). • Understand how to engage patients with cancer in their own CV care (inclusion of digital tools).

Research, education, and training in cardio-oncology • Consensus about CV toxicity definitions used in oncology trials. • Define standards for CV toxicity monitoring in oncology trials to avoid unexpected CV toxicities when new drugs are approved for clinical use. • Relevant model systems to allow high-throughput screening of new cancer treatments for CV toxicity. • Improved knowledge on CV toxicity mechanisms of new targeted cancer therapies and ICI and optimal treatment of CV toxicities. • Improved knowledge on the effects of radiation to specific cardiac substructures and the interactions between cardiotoxic systemic therapy and RT. • Further research into the underlying mechanisms that connect CVD and cancer, such as a genetic predisposition to CV toxicity. • Personalized medicine and use of big data and artificial intelligence tools.

Cardiovascular toxicity risk stratification

• Development of CV toxicity risk prediction tools including both treatment- and patient-related risk factors. • Validated prospective CV toxicity risk scores based on clinical outcomes. • Further research on the role of genetics in CV toxicity risk stratification. • Validation of CPET parameters for CV outcomes in patients with cancer.

Prevention, diagnosis, and management of CTR-CVT

• Raise awareness of the benefits of minimizing CV risk in patients with cancer in order to reduce the risk of CTR-CVT. • More data on new technologies (biomarkers, advanced echocardiography, CMR, etc.) and genetic profiles for the detection of early CV toxicity. • Prospective studies showing the impact on outcomes and/or quality of life (and frailty) of early CTR-CVT diagnosis and treatment. • Further evidence from prospective RCTs to define when cardioprotective medications improve patients’ outcomes. • Further research on the potential for aerobic exercise to reduce CTR-CVT. • RCTs of (new) CV therapies in patients with different types of CTR-CVT.

Long-term cancer survivorship programmes

• Development of optimal CV follow-up programmes after treatment for cancer (research on risk stratification, efficacy, and frequency of screening protocols). • Best screening strategies for RT-induced CAD. • Further research on CV preventive strategies for long-term CS.

15 ‘What to do’ and ‘what not to do’ messages from the Guidelines

Recommendations Classa Levelb

Recommendation Table 1 for a general approach to cardiovascular toxicity risk categorization CV toxicity risk stratification before starting potentially cardiotoxic anticancer therapy is recommended in all patients with cancer. I B Communicating the results of the CV toxicity risk assessment to the patient and other appropriate healthcare professionals is recommended. I C It is recommended that patients categorized as low CV toxicity risk should proceed with anticancer therapy without delay. I C

Cardiology referral is recommended in high-risk and very high-risk patients before anticancer therapy. I C

Discussion of the risk/benefit balance of cardiotoxic anticancer treatment in high- and very high-risk patients in a multidisciplinary approach prior to starting treatment is recommended. I C Cardiology referral is recommended for patients with cancer and pre-existing CVD or abnormal findings at baseline CV toxicity risk assessment who require potentially cardiotoxic anticancer therapy. I C

Continued Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

Recommendation Table 2 for electrocardiogram baseline assessment

An ECG is recommended in all patients starting cancer therapy as part of their baseline CV risk assessment. I C

In patients with an abnormal baseline ECG, referral to a cardiologist is recommended. I C

Recommendation Table 3 for cardiac biomarker assessment prior to potentially cardiotoxic therapies Baseline measurement of NP and/or cTn is recommended in all patients with cancer at risk of CTRCD if these biomarkers are going to be measured during treatment to detect CTRCD. I C Recommendation Table 4 for cardiac imaging modalities in patients with cancer General

Echocardiography is recommended as the first-line modality for the assessment of cardiac function in patients with cancer. I C

3D echocardiography is recommended as the preferred echocardiographic modality to measure LVEF. I B

GLS is recommended in all patients with cancer having echocardiography, if available. I C

Baseline cardiac imaging prior to potentially cardiotoxic therapies Baseline comprehensive TTE is recommended in all patients with cancer at high risk and very high risk of CV toxicity before starting anticancer therapy. I C Recommendation Table 5 for primary prevention of cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity Management of CVRF according to the 2021 ESC Guidelines on CVD prevention in clinical practice is recommended before, during, and after cancer therapy. I C Recommendation Table 6 for secondary prevention of cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity

Management of CVD according to applicable ESC Guidelines is recommended before, during, and after cancer therapy. I C

Recommendation Table 7 for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during anthracycline chemotherapy and in the first 12 months after therapy TTE

Baseline echocardiography is recommended in all patients with cancer before anthracycline chemotherapy. I B

In all adults receiving anthracycline chemotherapy, an echocardiogram is recommended within 12 months after completing treatment. I B

In high- and very high-risk patients, echocardiography is recommended every two cycles and within 3 months after completing treatment. I C Cardiac serum biomarkers

Baseline measurement of NP and cTn is recommended in high- and very high-risk patients prior to anthracycline chemotherapy. I B

cTn and NP monitoring before every cycle during anthracycline chemotherapy and 3 and 12 months after therapy completion is recommended in high- and very high-risk patients. I B Recommendation Table 8 for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during HER2-targeted therapies and in the first 12 months after therapy TTE

Baseline echocardiography is recommended before HER2-targeted therapies in all patients. I B

In patients receiving neoadjuvant or adjuvant HER2-targeted therapies, echocardiography is recommended every 3 months and within 12 months after completing treatment. I B In metastatic HER2+ disease, echocardiography is recommended every 3 months during the first year; if the patient remains asymptomatic without CV toxicity, then surveillance can be reduced to every 6 months during future treatment. I C Cardiac biomarkers

Baseline NP and cTn measurement are recommended in high- and very high-risk patients prior to anti-HER2-targeted therapies. I C

Continued Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

Recommendation Table 9 for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during fluoropyrimidine therapy Baseline CV risk assessment and evaluation including BP measurement, ECG, lipid profile, HbA1c measurement, and SCORE2/SCORE2- OP or equivalent is recommended before starting fluoropyrimidines. I C

A baseline echocardiogram is recommended in patients with a history of symptomatic CVD before starting fluoropyrimidines. I C

Recommendation Table 10 for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during VEGFi BP monitoring

BP measurement is recommended for patients treated with VEGFi, bevacizumab, or ramucirumab at every clinical visit. I C

Daily home monitoring of BP for patients treated with VEGFi during the first cycle, after each increase of VEGFi dose, and every 2–3 weeks thereafter is recommended. I C ECG monitoring In patients treated with VEGFi at moderate or high risk of QTc prolongation, QTc monitoring is recommended monthly during the first 3 months and every 3–6 months thereafter. I C Echocardiography

Baseline echocardiography is recommended in high- and very high-risk patients treated with VEGFi or bevacizumab. I C

Recommendation Table 11 for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during second- and third-generation BCR-ABL tyrosine kinase inhibitors

Baseline CV risk assessment is recommended in patients who require second- or third-generation BCR-ABL TKI. I C

In patients treated with nilotinib or ponatinib, CV risk assessment is recommended every 3 months during the first year and every 6–12 months thereafter. I C

Baseline echocardiography is recommended in patients scheduled to receive dasatinib. I C

Recommendation Table 12 for baseline risk assessment and monitoring Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy BP monitoring and management

BP measurement is recommended for patients treated with BTK inhibitors at every clinical visit. I B

Echocardiography

Baseline echocardiography is recommended in high-risk patients scheduled to receive BTK inhibitors. I C

TTE is recommended in all patients who develop AF during BTK inhibitor therapy. I C

AF

Opportunistic screening for AF by pulse-taking or ECG rhythm strip is recommended at every clinical visit during BTK inhibitor therapy. I C

Recommendation Table 13 for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during multiple myeloma therapies BP monitoring

BP measurement is recommended for patients treated with PI at every clinical visit. I C

Cardiac serum biomarkers

Measurement of NP is recommended prior to PI in high- and very high-risk patients. I C

NP and cTn measurements are recommended at baseline and every 3–6 months in patients with AL-CA. I B

TTE

Baseline echocardiography, including assessment for AL-CA, is recommended in all patients with MM scheduled to receive PI. I C

Continued Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

VTE prophylaxis

Therapeutic doses of LMWH are recommended in patients with MM with previous VTE. I B

Prophylactic doses of LMWH are recommended in patients with MM with VTE-related risk factors (excluding previous VTE) at least during the first 6 months of therapy. I A Recommendation Table 14 for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during combined RAF and MEK inhibitor therapy BP monitoring at each clinical visit and weekly outpatient monitoring during the first 3 months of treatment and monthly thereafter is recommended. I C In patients treated with cobimetinib/vemurafenib, an ECG is recommended at 2 and 4 weeks after initiation of treatment and every 3 months thereafter. I C Baseline echocardiography is recommended in all high- and very high-risk patients scheduled to receive combined RAF and MEK inhibitors. I C Recommendation Table 15 for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during immunotherapy

ECG, NP, and cTn measurements are recommended in all patients before starting ICI therapy. I B

Baseline echocardiography is recommended in high-risk patients before starting ICI therapy. I B

CV assessment is recommended every 6–12 months in high-risk patients who require long-term (.12 months) ICI treatment. I C

Recommendation Table 16 for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer Baseline CV risk assessment and estimation of 10-year fatal and non-fatal CVD risk with SCORE2 or SCORE2-OP is recommended in patients treated with ADT without pre-existing CVD. I B

Baseline and serial ECGs are recommended in patients at risk of QTc prolongation during ADT therapy. I B

Annual CV risk assessment is recommended during ADT. I B

Recommendation Table 17 for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during endocrine therapy for breast cancer Baseline CV risk assessment and estimation of 10-year fatal and non-fatal CVD risk with SCORE2 or SCORE2-OP is recommended in BC patients receiving endocrine therapies without pre-existing CVD. I C Annual CV risk assessment is recommended during endocrine therapy in BC patients with high 10-year risk of (fatal and non-fatal) CV events according to SCORE2/SCORE2-OP. I C Recommendation Table 18 for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor therapy

QTc monitoring is recommended at baseline and 14 and 28 days in all patients with cancer receiving ribociclib. I A

QTc monitoring is recommended in patients treated with ribociclib with any dose increase. I B

Recommendation Table 19 for baseline risk assessment and monitoring during ALK and EGFR inhibitors

Baseline CV risk assessment is recommended in patients before ALK inhibitors and EGFR inhibitors. I C

Baseline echocardiography is recommended in all patients with cancer before starting osimertinib. I B

Recommendation Table 20 for baseline risk assessment and monitoring in patients receiving chimeric antigen receptor T cell and tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes therapies

Baseline ECG, NP, and cTn are recommended in all patients with cancer before starting CAR-T and TIL therapies. I C

A baseline echocardiography is recommended in patients with pre-existing CVD before starting CAR-T and TIL therapies. I C

Measurement of NP, cTn, and echocardiography are recommended in patients who develop CRS of ASTCT ≥2. I C

Continued Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

Recommendation Table 21 for baseline risk assessment of patients before radiotherapy to a volume including the heart

Baseline CV risk assessment and estimation of 10-year fatal and non-fatal CVD risk with SCORE2 or SCORE2-OP is recommended. I B

Recommendation Table 22 for baseline risk assessment in haematopoietic stem cell transplantation patients Baseline and serial CV risk assessment (3 and 12 months, then yearly) including BP measurement, ECG, lipid measurement, and HbA1c is recommended in HSCT patients. I C

Echocardiography is recommended in all patients before HSCT. I C

Recommendation Table 23 for the management of cardiovascular disease and cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity in patients receiving anticancer treatment A specialist CV assessment is recommended for optimal diagnostic workup and management of patients with cancer who present with new CV toxicity during and after cancer treatment. I C Recommendation Table 24 for the management of cancer treatment-related cardiac dysfunction during anthracycline chemotherapy Anthracycline chemotherapy-induced symptomatic CTRCD

HF therapy is recommended for patients who develop symptomatic CTRCD during anthracycline chemotherapy. I B

Discontinuation of anthracycline chemotherapy is recommended in patients who develop symptomatic severe CTRCD. I C

Temporary interruption of anthracycline chemotherapy is recommended in patients who develop symptomatic moderate CTRCD and a multidisciplinary approach regarding the decision to restart is recommended. I C A multidisciplinary approach regarding interruption vs. continuation of anthracycline chemotherapy is recommended in patients who develop mild symptomatic CTRCD. I C Anthracycline chemotherapy-induced asymptomatic CTRCD Temporary interruption of anthracycline chemotherapy and initiation of HF therapy is recommended in patients who develop asymptomatic moderate or severe CTRCD. I C A multidisciplinary approach regarding the decision when to restart is recommended in all patients with moderate or severe asymptomatic CTRCD. I C Continuation of anthracycline chemotherapy is recommended in asymptomatic patients who have LVEF ≥50% and who have developed a significant fall in GLS or a troponin or a NP elevation .ULN. I C Recommendation Table 25 for the management of cancer treatment-related cardiac dysfunction during HER2-targeted therapies HER2-targeted therapy-induced symptomatic CTRCD HF therapy is recommended for patients who develop symptomatic moderate-to-severe CTRCD with LVEF , 50% during HER2targeted treatment. I B Temporary interruption of HER2-targeted treatment is recommended in patients who develop moderate or severe symptomatic CTRCD and the decision to restart should be based on a multidisciplinary approach after improvement of LV function and symptoms resolved. I C In patients who develop mild symptomatic CTRCD, HF therapy and a multidisciplinary approach regarding the decision to continue vs. interrupt HER2-targeted therapy are recommended. I C HER2-targeted therapy-induced asymptomatic CTRCD Temporary interruption of HER2-targeted therapy and initiation of HF therapy is recommended in patients who develop asymptomatic severe CTRCD. I C A multidisciplinary approach regarding the decision to restart HER2-targeted treatment is recommended in patients with severe asymptomatic CTRCD. I C Continuation of HER2-targeted therapy is recommended in patients who develop asymptomatic mild (LVEF ≥50%) CTRCDc with more frequent cardiac monitoring. I C ACE-I/ARB and beta-blockers are recommended in patients who develop asymptomatic moderate (LVEF 40–49%) CTRCDc during HER2-targeted treatment. I C Recommendation Table 26 for the diagnosis and management of immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated myocarditis

cTn, ECG, and CV imaging (echocardiography and CMR) are recommended to diagnose ICI-associated myocarditis. I B

In patients with suspected ICI-associated myocarditis, temporary interruption of ICI treatment is recommended until the diagnosis is confirmed or refuted. I C

Continued Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

Interruption of ICI treatment is recommended in patients with confirmed ICI-associated myocarditis. I C

Continuous ECG monitoring to assess for new AV block and tachyarrhythmias during the acute phase is recommended for all patients with symptomatic ICI-associated myocarditis. I C

Early high-dose corticosteroids are recommended in patients with cancer and confirmed ICI-associated myocarditis. I C

Continuation of high-dose corticosteroids is recommended for the treatment of ICI-associated myocarditis until resolution of symptoms, LV systolic dysfunction, conduction abnormalities, and significant cTn reduction. I C Admission to ICU (level 3), treatment with i.v. methylprednisolone, and optimal CV treatment including mechanical support (when indicated) is recommended for patients with ICI-associated fulminant myocarditis. I C A multidisciplinary discussion is recommended before restarting ICI treatment in selected patients with previous uncomplicated ICIassociated myocarditis. I C Recommendation Table 27 for the diagnosis and management of Takotsubo syndrome in patients with cancer

Coronary angiography (invasive or CCTA) is recommended to exclude ACS. I C

CMR is recommended to exclude myocarditis and MI. I B

QT-prolonging drugs are not recommended during the acute TTS phase. III C

Recommendation Table 28 for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients receiving anticancer treatment An invasive strategy is recommended in patients with cancer presenting with STEMI or high-risk NSTE-ACS with life expectancy ≥6 months. I B

A temporary interruption of cancer therapy is recommended in patients where the cancer therapy is suspected as a contributing cause. I C

In patients with cancer, thrombocytopaenia and ACS, aspirin is not recommended if platelets ,10 000/μL. III C

In patients with cancer, thrombocytopaenia and ACS, clopidogrel is not recommended if platelets ,30 000/μL and prasugrel or ticagrelor are not recommended if platelets ,50 000/μL. III C Recommendation Table 29 for the management of chronic coronary syndromes in patients receiving anticancer treatment Individualized duration of DAPT is recommended in patients with cancer with CCS, following revascularization, based upon thrombotic/ ischaemic and bleeding risk, type and stage of cancer, and current cancer treatment. I C Recommendation Table 30 for the management of valvular heart disease in patients receiving anticancer treatment In patients with cancer and pre-existing severe VHD, management according to the 2021 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of VHD is recommended, taking into consideration cancer prognosis and patient preferences. I C In patients with cancer developing new VHD during cancer therapy, management according to the 2021 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of VHD is recommended, taking into consideration cancer prognosis and patient comorbidities. I C Recommendation Table 31 for the management of atrial fibrillation in patients receiving anticancer treatment Long-term anticoagulation is recommended for stroke/systemic thromboembolism prevention in patients with cancer with AF and a CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥2 (men) or ≥3 (women) as per the 2020 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation. I C Thromboembolic and bleeding risk reassessment is recommended during follow-up in patients with cancer with AF. I C

Antiplatelet therapy or prophylactic LMWH are not recommended for stroke or systemic thromboembolism prevention in AF with cancer. III C Recommendation Table 32 for the management of long QTc and ventricular arrhythmias in patients receiving anticancer treatment How to manage QTc prolongation in patients with cancer Discontinuation of QTc-prolonging cancer therapy is recommended in patients who develop TdP or sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias during treatment. I C Temporary interruption of QTc-prolonging cancer therapy is recommended in patients who develop asymptomatic QTcF ≥500 ms and an ECG should be repeated every 24 h until resolution of the QTcF prolongation. I C Immediate withdrawal of any offending drug and correction of electrolyte abnormalities and other risk factors is recommended in patients with cancer who develop QTcF ≥500 ms. I C Weekly ECG monitoring is recommended in asymptomatic patients with cancer with QTcF 480–500 ms who are treated with a QTcprolonging cancer therapy. I C

Continued Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

A 12-lead ECG is recommended after any dose increase of QTc-prolonging cancer therapy. I C

Restarting QTc-prolonging cancer therapy A multidisciplinary discussion is recommended before restarting QTc-prolonging drugs in patients who have developed significant QTcF prolongation, to discuss alternative cancer treatments. I C Weekly ECG monitoring during the first 4–6 weeks and then monthly thereafter is recommended in patients with cancer after restarting QTc-prolonging cancer therapy. I C Recommendation Table 33 for the management of arterial hypertension in patients receiving anticancer treatment General Effective treatment of cancer therapy-induced arterial hypertension to prevent cancer treatment interruption and CV complications is recommended. I C A BP target ,140 mmHg systolic and ,90 mmHg diastolic is recommended during cancer therapy. I C The competing cancer and CV risk evaluation is recommended if the systolic BP is ≥180 mmHg or diastolic BP ≥110 mmHg, and any cancer therapy associated with hypertension should be deferred or temporarily withheld until the BP is controlled to values ,160 mmHg (systolic) and ,100 mmHg (diastolic). I C Cancer therapy-induced arterial hypertension treatment

ACE-I or ARB are the first-line antihypertensive drugs recommended for BP management in patients with cancer. I B

Dihydropyridine CCB are recommended as second-line antihypertensive drugs for patients with cancer with uncontrolled BP. I C

Combination therapy with ACE-I or ARB and dihydropyridine CCB is recommended in patients with cancer with systolic BP ≥160 mmHg and diastolic BP ≥100 mmHg. I C Diltiazem and verapamil are not recommended to treat arterial hypertension in patients with cancer due to their drug–drug interactions. III C Recommendation Table 34 for the management of venous thromboembolism in patients receiving anticancer treatment Apixaban, edoxaban, or rivaroxaban are recommended for the treatment of symptomatic or incidental VTE in patients with cancer without contraindications. I A

LMWH are recommended for the treatment of symptomatic or incidental VTE in patients with cancer with platelet count .50 000/μL. I A

Catheter-associated VTE Duration of anticoagulation in patients with cancer with a catheter-associated VTE is recommended for a minimum of 3 months and continuing longer if the catheter remains in situ. I C Recommendation Table 35 for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis during anticancer treatment Extended prophylaxis with LMWH for 4 weeks post-operatively is recommended for patients with cancer undergoing major open or laparoscopic abdominal or pelvic surgery with low bleeding risk and high VTE risk. I B Prophylactic LMWH for the primary prevention of VTE is indicated in hospitalized patients with cancer or those with prolonged bed rest or reduced mobility in the absence of bleeding or other contraindications. I B A discussion with the patient about the relative benefits and harms, cancer prognosis, drug cost, and duration of treatment is recommended prior to prophylactic anticoagulation for the primary prevention of VTE. I C Recommendation Table 36 for management of peripheral artery disease during anticancer treatment In patients who develop new symptomatic PAD, a multidisciplinary approach regarding the decision to continue vs. interrupt culprit cancer therapy is recommended. I C Recommendation Table 37 for the management of pulmonary hypertension during anticancer treatment Right-heart catheterization and discontinuation of dasatinib is recommended in patients who develop symptomatic or asymptomatic increase in peak TRV . 3.4 m/s. I C In patients with confirmed dasatinib-induced PAH or new asymptomatic peak TRV . 3.4 m/s, an alternative BCR-ABL inhibitor is recommended after peak TRV recovery to ,2.8 m/s. I C Recommendation Table 38 for the management of pericardial diseases in patients receiving anticancer treatment General Diagnosis and management of acute pericarditis in patients with cancer based on the 2015 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of pericardial diseases is recommended and a multidisciplinary discussion is needed before interrupting cancer therapy. I C

Continued Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

Diagnosis and management of ICI-associated pericarditis Multimodality CV imaging (echocardiography, CMR + CT), ECG and measurement of cardiac biomarkers are recommended to confirm the diagnosis, assess the haemodynamic consequences of pericardial disease, and rule out associated myocarditis. I C

Prednisolone and colchicine are recommended for patients with ICI-associated pericarditis. I C

Interruption of ICI treatment in patients with confirmed ICI-associated pericarditis with moderate-to-severe pericardial effusion is recommended. I C

A multidisciplinary discussion is recommended before restarting ICI treatment. I C

Recommendation Table 39 for end-of-cancer therapy cardiovascular risk assessment

Educating and supporting patients with cancer to make appropriate healthy lifestyle choices is recommended. I C

Education is recommended for patients with cancer regarding recognition for early signs and symptoms of CVD. I C

CVRF assessment is recommended during the first year after cancer therapy and thereafter according to the 2021 ESC Guidelines on CVD prevention in clinical practice. I B In asymptomatic high-risk patients, echocardiography and cardiac serum biomarkers are recommended at 3 and 12 months after completion of cancer therapy. I B Cardiology referral is recommended in patients with cancer with new cardiac symptoms or new asymptomatic abnormalities in echocardiography and/or cardiac serum biomarkers at the end of therapy assessment. I C

Long-term continuation of cardiac medication is recommended in patients who develop severe CTRCD during cancer therapy. I C

CV follow-up and treatment optimization is recommended in patients who developed TKI-mediated hypertension during cancer therapy. I C

CV follow-up and treatment optimization is recommended in patients who developed vascular toxicities during cancer therapy. I C

ECG follow-up is recommended in patients who developed QT lengthening or LQTS during cancer therapy. I C

Recommendation Table 40 for cardiovascular surveillance in asymptomatic adults who are childhood and adolescent cancer survivors Education of adults who are childhood and adolescent CS treated with anthracyclines, mitoxantrone, and/or RT to a volume including the heart and their healthcare providers regarding their increased CV risk is recommended. I B Annual screening for modifiable CVRF is recommended in adults who are childhood and adolescent CS treated with anthracyclines, mitoxantrone, and/or RT to a volume including the heart. I C

CV assessment is recommended in female childhood and adolescent CS prior to pregnancy or in the first trimester. I C

Recommendation Table 41 for cardiovascular surveillance in asymptomatic adult cancer survivors Annual CV risk assessment, including ECG and NP, and CVRF management is recommended in CS who were treated with a potentially cardiotoxic cancer drug or RT. I B

CV toxicity risk restratification is recommended 5 years after therapy to organize long-term follow-up. I C

Recommendation Table 42 for adult cancer survivors who develop cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction late after cardiotoxic cancer therapy

ACE-I/ARB and/or beta-blockers are recommended in adult CS with moderate asymptomatic CTRCD. I C

Recommendation Table 43 for adult cancer survivors with coronary artery disease Asymptomatic radiation-induced CAD detected during surveillance Non-invasive stress testing is recommended in asymptomatic CS with new moderate or severe radiation-induced CAD detected on CCTA to guide ischaemia-directed management. I C A MDT discussion is recommended for clinical decision-making in patients with radiation-induced CAD and inducible ischaemia or severe left main CAD. I C

Continued Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

Symptomatic CAD Pre-operative assessment of LIMA and RIMA viability, venous access, and sternal wound healing is recommended in CS with radiationinduced CAD where CABG is considered. I C Recommendation Table 44 for adult cancer survivors with valvular heart disease

A MDT approach is recommended to discuss and define the surgical risk in CS with severe VHD. I C

Recommendation Table 46 for cardiovascular monitoring in cancer survivors during pregnancy In high-risk female CS, pre-pregnancy counselling and management during pregnancy and around delivery by a multidisciplinary pregnancy heart team is recommended. I C A baseline CV evaluation including history, physical examination, ECG, NP, and echocardiography is recommended in female CS with a history of CTRCD who are considering pregnancy. I C A CV evaluation including echocardiography is recommended at 12 weeks of pregnancy in female CS who are either high-risk or who received potentially cardiotoxic cancer therapy and did not have a baseline CV assessment. I C Recommendation Table 47 for cardiovascular assessment and monitoring of pregnant women with cancer Management by an expert MDT (the pregnancy heart team) in an expert centre is recommended for pregnant women with cancer who require cardiotoxic cancer therapy. I C Cardiac assessment prior to cardiotoxic cancer therapy in pregnant women is recommended and consists of clinical history, physical examination, ECG, and echocardiography. I C Recommendation Table 48 for carcinoid valvular heart diseases Echocardiography is recommended for the detection of carcinoid cardiac involvement in all patients with carcinoid syndrome and elevated NP levels and/or clinical signs of carcinoid heart disease, and for surveillance every 3 or 6 months depending on the severity of cardiac involvement and clinical status. I B A MDT discussion for optimal medial management to prevent carcinoid crisis is recommended before any invasive or surgical cardiac procedure. I C Valve replacement surgery is recommended in symptomatic patients with severe carcinoid tricuspid or pulmonary VHD and an expected survival ≥12 months. I C Valve replacement or repair surgery is recommended in symptomatic patients with severe carcinoid mitral or aortic VHD and an expected survival ≥12 months. I C Recommendation Table 49 for amyloid light-chain cardiac amyloidosis diagnosis and monitoring

Echocardiography, NP, and cTn are recommended for the diagnosis of AL-CA in patients with plasma cell dyscrasia. I B

CMR is recommended in patients with suspected AL-CA. I A

Recommendation Table 50 for risk stratification and monitoring for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices undergoing radiotherapy Risk stratification including planned radiation type and energy, dose to CIED, the patient’s device type, and pacing dependence is recommended prior to starting treatment. I C In patients undergoing RT, a CIED check is recommended in all patients before and after completing RT, and during RT according to individual risk. I C In patients with a CIED undergoing RT at high risk of arrhythmia and/or device dysfunction, ECG monitoring and/or pulse oximetry are recommended during every RT session. I C © ESC 2022

3D, three-dimensional; ACE-I, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors; ACS, acute coronary syndromes; ADT, androgen deprivation therapy; AF, atrial fibrillation; AL-CA, amyloid light-chain cardiac amyloidosis; ALK, anaplastic lymphoma kinase;ARB, angiotensin receptorblocker; ASTCT, AmericanSociety for Transplantation and Cellular;AV, atrioventricular; BC, breast cancer; BCR- ABL, breakpoint cluster region–Abelson oncogene locus; BP, blood pressure; BTK, Bruton tyrosine kinase; CABG, coronary artery bypass graft; CAD, coronary artery disease; CAR-T, chimeric antigen receptor T cell; CCB, calcium channel blockers; CCS, chronic coronary syndromes; CCTA, coronary computed tomography angiography; CHA2DS2-VASc, Congestive heart failure, Hypertension, Age .75 years (2 points), Diabetes mellitus, Stroke (2 points)—Vascular disease, Age 65–74 years, Sex category (female); CIED, cardiac implantable electronic device; CMR, cardiac magnetic resonance; CRS, cytokine release syndrome; CT, computed tomography; cTn, cardiac troponin; CTRCD, cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction; CS, cancer survivors; CV, cardiovascular; CVD, cardiovascular disease; CVRF, cardiovascular risk factors; DAPT, dual antiplatelet therapy; EACTS, European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery; ECG, electrocardiogram; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; ESC, European Society of Cardiology; GLS, global longitudinal strain; HbA1c, glycated haemoglobin; HER2, human epidermal receptor 2; HF, heart failure; HSCT, haematopoietic stem cell transplantation; ICI, immune checkpoint inhibitors; ICU, intensive care unit; i.v., intravenous; LIMA, left internal mammary artery; LMWH, low-molecular-weight heparins; LQTS, long QT syndrome; LV, left ventricular; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; MDT, multidisciplinary team; MEK, mitogen-activated extracellular signal-regulated kinase; MI, myocardial infarction; MM, multiple myeloma; NP, natriuretic peptides; NSTE-ACS, non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes; PAD, peripheral artery disease; PAH, pulmonary arterial hypertension; PI, proteasome inhibitors; QTc, corrected QT interval; QTcF, corrected QT interval using Fridericia correction; RAF, rapidly accelerated fibrosarcoma; RIMA, right internal mammary artery; RT, radiotherapy; SCORE2, Systematic Coronary Risk Estimation 2; SCORE2-OP, Systematic Coronary Risk Estimation 2— Older Persons; STEMI, ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction; TdP, torsade de pointes; TIL, tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitors; TTE, transthoracic echocardiography; TTS, Takotsubo syndrome; TRV, tricuspid regurgitation velocity; ULN, upper limit of normal; VEGFi, vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors; VHD, valvular heart disease; VTE, venous thromboembolism. aClass of recommendation. bLevel of evidence. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

16 Quality indicators for

cardio-oncology

Quality indicators (QIs) are tools that may be used to evaluate care quality, including structural, process, and outcomes of care.835 They may also serve as a mechanism for enhancing adherence to guideline recommendations, through associated quality improvement initiatives and the benchmarking of care providers.836,837 As such, the role of QIs in improving care and outcomes for CVD is increasingly recognized by healthcare authorities, professional organizations, payers, and the public.835 The ESC understands the need for measuring and reporting quality and outcomes of CV care and has established methods for the development of the ESC QIs for the quantification of care and outcomes for CVD.835 These methods were used to develop QIs pertinent to cardio-oncology in parallel with the writing of this Clinical Practice Guideline document and through the collaboration with patient representatives and domain experts. The QIs, alongside their measurement specifications and development process will be published separately.

17 Supplementary data

Supplementary data is available at European Heart Journal online.

18 Data availability statement

No new data were generated or analysed in support of this research.

19 Author information

Author/Task Force Member Affiliations: Liam S. Couch, King’s College London BHF Centre, the Rayne Institute, St Thomas’ Hospital, King’s College London, London, United Kingdom; Riccardo Asteggiano, Cardiology, LARC (Laboratorio Analisi Ricerca Clinica), Turin, Italy, and School of Medicine, Insubria University, Varese, Italy; Marianne C. Aznar, Division of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom; Jutta Bergler-Klein, Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Giuseppe Boriani, Cardiology Division, Department of Biomedical, Metabolic and Neural Sciences, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Policlinico di Modena, Modena, Italy; Daniela Cardinale, Cardioncology Unit, European Institute of Oncology—I.R.C.C.S., Milan, Italy; Raul Cordoba, Department of Hematology, Fundacion Jimenez Diaz University Hospital, Madrid, Spain, and Cancer Research Group, Health Research Institute IIS-FJD, Madrid, Spain; Bernard Cosyns, Cardiology, Centrum voor Hart en Vaatziekten (CHVZ), Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel (UZB), Brussels, Belgium, and In Vivo Molecular and Cellular (ICMI) Center, Vrij Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium; David J. Cutter, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom, and Oxford Cancer Centre, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, United Kingdom; Evandro de Azambuja, Medical Oncology Department, Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels, Belgium; Rudolf A. de Boer, Cardiology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands; Susan F. Dent, Department of Medicine, Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC, United States of America; Dimitrios Farmakis, Medical School, University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus; Sofie A. Gevaert, Cardiology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium; Diana A. Gorog, Postgraduate Medicine, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, United Kingdom, and National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom, and Cardiology Department, East and North Hertfordshire NHS Trust, Stevenage, United Kingdom; Joerg Herrmann, Department of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America; Daniel Lenihan, Cardio-Oncology, International Cardio-Oncology Society, Tampa, FL, United States of America, and Cardiology, Saint Francis Healthcare, Cape Girardeau, MO, United States of America; Javid Moslehi, Section of Cardio-Oncology & Immunology, Cardiovascular Research Institute, University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), San Francisco, CA, United States of America; Brenda Moura, Cardiology Department, Armed Forces Hospital, Porto, Portugal, and Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal; Sonja S. Salinger, Clinic for Cardiovascular Disease, University Clinical Center, Nis, Serbia, and Medical Faculty, University of Nis, Nis, Serbia; Richard Stephens (United Kingdom), ESC Patient Forum, Sophia Antipolis, France; Thomas M. Suter, Department of Cardiology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland; Sebastian Szmit, Department of Pulmonary Circulation, Thromboembolic Diseases and Cardiology, Centre of Postgraduate Medical Education, Otwock, Poland, and Institute of Hematology and Transfusion Medicine, Transfusion Medicine, Warsaw, Poland; Juan Tamargo, Pharmacology and Toxicology, Universidad Complutense, Madrid, Spain; Paaladinesh Thavendiranathan, Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Ted Rogers Program in Cardiotoxicity Prevention, Peter Munk Cardiac Center, Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Carlo G. Tocchetti, Cardio-Oncology Unit, Department of Translational Medical Sciences, Federico II University, Naples, Italy, and Center for Basic and Clinical Immunology Research (CISI), Federico II University, Naples, Italy, and Interdepartmental Center for Clinical and Translational Research (CIRCET), Federico II University, Naples, Italy; Peter van der Meer, Cardiology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands; Helena J.H. van der Pal, Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, Utrecht, Netherlands.

20 Appendix

ESC Scientific Document Group Includes Document Reviewers and ESC National Cardiac Societies.

Document Reviewers: Patrizio Lancellotti (CPG Review Coordinator) (Belgium), Franck Thuny (CPG Review Coordinator) (France), Magdy Abdelhamid (Egypt), Victor Aboyans (France), Berthe Aleman (Netherlands), Joachim Alexandre (France), Ana Barac (United States of America), Michael A. Borger (Germany), Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

Ruben Casado-Arroyo (Belgium), Jennifer Cautela (France), Jolanta Čelutkienė (Lithuania), Maja Cikes (Croatia), Alain Cohen-Solal (France), Kreena Dhiman (United Kingdom), Stéphane Ederhy (France), Thor Edvardsen (Norway), Laurent Fauchier (France), Michael Fradley (United States of America), Julia Grapsa (United Kingdom), Sigrun Halvorsen (Norway), Michael Heuser (Germany), Marc Humbert (France), Tiny Jaarsma (Sweden), Thomas Kahan (Sweden), Aleksandra Konradi (Russian Federation), Konstantinos C. Koskinas (Switzerland), Dipak Kotecha (United Kingdom), Bonnie Ky (United States of America), Ulf Landmesser (Germany), Basil S. Lewis (Israel), Ales Linhart (Czech Republic), Gregory Y. H. Lip (United Kingdom), Maja-Lisa Løchen (Norway), Katarzyna Malaczynska-Rajpold (United Kingdom), Marco Metra (Italy), Richard Mindham (United Kingdom), Marie Moonen (Belgium), Tomas G. Neilan (United States of America), Jens Cosedis Nielsen (Denmark), Anna-Sonia Petronio (Italy), Eva Prescott (Denmark), Amina Rakisheva (Kazakhstan), Joe-Elie Salem (France), Gianluigi Savarese (Sweden), Marta Sitges (Spain), Jurrien ten Berg (Netherlands), Rhian M. Touyz (Canada/United Kingdom), Agnieszka Tycinska (Poland), Matthias Wilhelm (Switzerland), Jose Luis Zamorano (Spain)

ESC National Cardiac Societies actively involved in the review process of the 2022 ESC Guidelines on cardio-oncology: Algeria: Algerian Society of Cardiology, Nadia Laredj; Armenia: Armenian Cardiologists Association, Parounak Zelveian; Austria: Austrian Society of Cardiology, Peter P. Rainer; Azerbaijan: Azerbaijan Society of Cardiology, Fuad Samadov; Belarus: Belorussian Scientific Society of Cardiologists, Uladzimir Andrushchuk; Belgium: Belgian Society of Cardiology, Bernhard L. Gerber; Bosnia and Herzegovina: Association of Cardiologists of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Mirsad Selimović; Bulgaria: Bulgarian Society of Cardiology, Elena Kinova; Croatia: Croatian Cardiac Society, Jure Samardzic; Cyprus: Cyprus Society of Cardiology, Evagoras Economides; Czechia: Czech Society of Cardiology, Radek Pudil; Denmark: Danish Society of Cardiology, Kirsten M. Nielsen; Egypt: Egyptian Society of Cardiology, Tarek A. Kafafy; Estonia: Estonian Society of Cardiology, Riina Vettus; Finland: Finnish Cardiac Society, Suvi Tuohinen; France: French Society of Cardiology, Stéphane Ederhy; Georgia: Georgian Society of Cardiology, Zurab Pagava; Germany: German Cardiac Society, Tienush Rassaf; Greece: Hellenic Society of Cardiology, Alexandros Briasoulis; Hungary: Hungarian Society of Cardiology, Dániel Czuriga; Iceland: Icelandic Society of Cardiology, Karl K. Andersen; Ireland: Irish Cardiac Society, Yvonne Smyth; Israel: Israel Heart Society, Zaza Iakobishvili; Italy: Italian Federation of Cardiology, Iris Parrini; Kazakhstan: Association of Cardiologists of Kazakhstan, Amina Rakisheva; Kosovo (Republic of): Kosovo Society of Cardiology, Edita Pllana Pruthi; Kyrgyzstan: Kyrgyz Society of Cardiology, Erkin Mirrakhimov; Latvia: Latvian Society of Cardiology, Oskars Kalejs; Lebanon: Lebanese Society of Cardiology, Hadi Skouri; Libya: Libyan Cardiac Society, Hisham Benlamin; Lithuania: Lithuanian Society of Cardiology, Diana Žaliaduonytė; Luxembourg: Luxembourg Society of Cardiology, Alessandra Iovino; Malta: Maltese Cardiac Society, Alice M. Moore; Moldova (Republic of): Moldavian Society of Cardiology, Daniela Bursacovschi; Morocco: Moroccan Society of Cardiology, Aatif Benyass; Netherlands: Netherlands Society of Cardiology, Olivier Manintveld; North Macedonia: North Macedonian Society of Cardiology, Marijan Bosevski; Norway: Norwegian Society of Cardiology, Geeta Gulati; Poland: Polish Cardiac Society, Przemysław Leszek; Portugal: Portuguese Society of Cardiology, Manuela Fiuza; Romania: Romanian Society of Cardiology, Ruxandra Jurcut; Russian Federation: Russian Society of Cardiology, Yury Vasyuk; San Marino: San Marino Society of Cardiology, Marina Foscoli; Serbia: Cardiology Society of Serbia, Dragan Simic; Slovakia: Slovak Society of Cardiology, Miroslav Slanina; Slovenia: Slovenian Society of Cardiology, Luka Lipar; Spain: Spanish Society of Cardiology, Ana Martin-Garcia; Sweden: Swedish Society of Cardiology, Laila Hübbert; Switzerland: Swiss Society of Cardiology, Reto Kurmann; Syrian Arab Republic: Syrian Cardiovascular Association, Ahmad Alayed; Tunisia: Tunisian Society of Cardiology and Cardio-Vascular Surgery, Leila Abid; Turkey: Turkish Society of Cardiology, Cafer Zorkun; Ukraine: Ukrainian Association of Cardiology, Elena Nesukay; United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland: British Cardiovascular Society, Charlotte Manisty, Uzbekistan: Association of Cardiologists of Uzbekistan, Nigora Srojidinova.

ESC Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) Committee: Colin Baigent (Chairperson) (United Kingdom), Magdy Abdelhamid (Egypt), Victor Aboyans (France), Sotiris Antoniou (United Kingdom), Elena Arbelo (Spain), Riccardo Asteggiano (Italy), Andreas Baumbach (United Kingdom), Michael A. Borger (Germany), Jelena Čelutkienė (Lithuania), Maja Cikes (Croatia), Jean-Philippe Collet (France), Volkmar Falk (Germany), Laurent Fauchier (France), Chris P. Gale (United Kingdom), Sigrun Halvorsen (Norway), Bernard Iung (France), Tiny Jaarsma (Sweden), Aleksandra Konradi (Russian Federation), Konstantinos C. Koskinas (Switzerland), Dipak Kotecha (United Kingdom), Ulf Landmesser (Germany), Basil S. Lewis (Israel), Ales Linhart (Czech Republic), Maja-Lisa Løchen (Norway), Richard Mindham (United Kingdom), Jens Cosedis Nielsen (Denmark), Steffen E. Petersen (United Kingdom), Eva Prescott (Denmark), Amina Rakisheva (Kazakhstan), Marta Sitges (Spain), Rhian M. Touyz (Canada/United Kingdom).

21 References

1. Herrmann J, Lenihan D, Armenian S, Barac A, Blaes A, Cardinale D, et al. Defining cardiovascular toxicities of cancer therapies: an International Cardio-Oncology Society (IC-OS) consensus statement. Eur Heart J 2022;43:280–299. 2. Herrmann J, Lerman A, Sandhu NP, Villarraga HR, Mulvagh SL, Kohli M. Evaluation and management of patients with heart disease and cancer: Cardio-oncology. Mayo Clin Proc 2014;89:1287–1306. 3. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2021;71:209–249. 4. Zamorano JL, Lancellotti P, Rodriguez Muñoz D, Aboyans V, Asteggiano R, Galderisi M, et al. 2016 ESC Position Paper on cancer treatments and cardiovascular toxicity developed under the auspices of the ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines. Eur Heart J 2016;37:2768–2801. 5. Lancellotti P, Suter TM, López-Fernández T, Galderisi M, Lyon AR, Van Der Meer P, et al. Cardio-oncology services: rationale, organization, and implementation. Eur Heart J 2019;40:1756–1763. 6. Michel G, Mulder RL, van der Pal HJH, Skinner R, Bárdi E, Brown MC, et al. Evidence-based recommendations for the organization of long-term follow-up Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

care for childhood and adolescent cancer survivors: a report from the PanCareSurFup Guidelines Working Group. J Cancer Surviv 2019;13:759–772. 7. Armenian SH, Hudson MM, Mulder RL, Chen MH, Constine LS, Dwyer M, et al. Recommendations for cardiomyopathy surveillance for survivors of childhood cancer: a report from the International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group. Lancet Oncol 2015;16:e123–e136. 8. van Kalsbeek RJ, Mulder RLRL, Skinner R, Kremer LCMCM. The concept of cancer survivorship and models for long-term follow-up. Front Horm Res 2021;54:1–15. 9. Herrmann J. Adverse cardiac effects of cancer therapies: cardiotoxicity and arrhythmia. Nat Rev Cardiol 2020;17:474–502. 10. Herrmann J. Vascular toxic effects of cancer therapies. Nat Rev Cardiol 2020;17: 503–522. 11. Gilchrist SC, Barac A, Ades PA, Alfano CM, Franklin BA, Jones LW, et al. Cardio-oncology rehabilitation to manage cardiovascular outcomes in cancer patients and survivors: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2019;139:e997–e1012. 12. Lyon AR, Dent S, Stanway S, Earl H, Brezden-Masley C, Cohen-Solal A, et al. Baseline cardiovascular risk assessment in cancer patients scheduled to receive cardiotoxic cancer therapies: a position statement and new risk assessment tools from the Cardio-Oncology Study Group of the Heart Failure Association of the European Society. Eur J Heart Fail 2020;22:1945–1960. 13. Battisti NML, Andres MS, Lee KA, Ramalingam S, Nash T, Mappouridou S, et al. Incidence of cardiotoxicity and validation of the Heart Failure Association– International Cardio-Oncology Society risk stratification tool in patients treated with trastuzumab for HER2-positive early breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2021;188:149–163. 14. McDonagh TA, Metra M, Adamo M, Gardner RS, Baumbach A, Böhm M, et al. 2021 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure. Eur Heart J 2021;42:3599–3726. 15. Jaffe AS, Vasile VC, Milone M, Saenger AK, Olson KN, Apple FS. Diseased skeletal muscle: a noncardiac source of increased circulating concentrations of cardiac troponin T. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011;58:1819–1824. 16. Schmid J, Liesinger L, Birner-Gruenberger R, Stojakovic T, Scharnagl H, Dieplinger B, et al. Elevated cardiac troponin T in patients with skeletal myopathies. J Am Coll Cardiol 2018;71:1540–1549. 17. Delombaerde D, Vervloet D, Franssen C, Croes L, Gremonprez F, Prenen H, et al. Clinical implications of isolated troponinemia following immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. ESMO Open 2021;6:100216. 18. Ferreira VM, Schulz-Menger J, Holmvang G, Kramer CM, Carbone I, Sechtem U, et al. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance in nonischemic myocardial inflammation: expert recommendations. J Am Coll Cardiol 2018;72:3158–3176. 19. Visseren FLJ, Mach F, Smulders YM, Carballo D, Koskinas KC, Bäck M, et al. 2021 ESC Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice. Eur Heart J 2021;42:3227–3337. 20. Vandenberk B, Vandael E, Robyns T, Vandenberghe J, Garweg C, Foulon V, et al. Which QT correction formulae to use for QT monitoring? J Am Heart Assoc 2016;5:e003264. 21. Armenian SH, Lacchetti C, Barac A, Carver J, Constine LS, Denduluri N, et al. Prevention and monitoring of cardiac dysfunction in survivors of adult cancers: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline. J Clin Oncol 2017;35:893–911. 22. Curigliano G, Lenihan D, Fradley M, Ganatra S, Barac A, Blaes A, et al. Management of cardiac disease in cancer patients throughout oncological treatment: ESMO consensus recommendations. Ann Oncol 2020;31:171–190. 23. Rossello X, Dorresteijn JAN, Janssen A, Lambrinou E, Scherrenberg M, Bonnefoy-Cudraz E, et al. Risk prediction tools in cardiovascular disease prevention: a report from the ESC Prevention of CVD Programme led by the European Association of Preventive Cardiology (EAPC) in collaboration with the Acute Cardiovascular Care Association (ACCA) and the Association of Cardiovascular Nursing and Allied Professions (ACNAP). Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs 2019;18:534–544. 24. Romond EH, Jeong JH, Rastogi P, Swain SM, Geyer CE, Ewer MS, et al. Seven-year follow-up assessment of cardiac function in NSABP B-31, a randomized trial comparing doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel (ACP) with ACP plus trastuzumab as adjuvant therapy for patients with node-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2012;30: 3792–3799. 25. Ezaz G, Long JB, Gross CP, Chen J. Risk prediction model for heart failure and cardiomyopathy after adjuvant trastuzumab therapy for breast cancer. J Am Heart Assoc 2014;3:e000472. 26. Rushton M, Johnson C, Dent S. Trastuzumab-induced cardiotoxicity: testing a clinical risk score in a real-world cardio-oncology population. Curr Oncol 2017;24: 176–180. 27. Dranitsaris G, Rayson D, Vincent M, Chang J, Gelmon K, Sandor D, et al. The development of a predictive model to estimate cardiotoxic risk for patients with metastatic breast cancer receiving anthracyclines. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2008; 107:443–450. 28. Abdel-Qadir H, Thavendiranathan P, Austin PC, Lee DS, Amir E, Tu J V, et al. Development and validation of a multivariable prediction model for major adverse cardiovascular events after early stage breast cancer: a population-based cohort study. Eur Heart J 2019;40:3913–3920. 29. Kang Y, Assuncao BL, Denduluri S, McCurdy S, Luger S, Lefebvre B, et al. Symptomatic heart failure in acute leukemia patients treated with anthracyclines. JACC CardioOncology 2019;1:208–217. 30. Martín García A, Mitroi C, Mazón Ramos P, García Sanz R, Virizuela JA, Arenas M, et al. Stratification and management of cardiovascular risk in cancer patients. A consensus document of the SEC, FEC, SEOM, SEOR, SEHH, SEMG, AEEMT, AEEC, and AECC. Rev Española Cardiol (English Ed) 2021;74:438–448. 31. Caro-Codón J, López-Fernández T, Álvarez-Ortega C, Zamora Auñón P, Rodríguez IR, Gómez Prieto P, et al. Cardiovascular risk factors during cancer treatment. Prevalence and prognostic relevance: insights from the CARDIOTOX registry. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2022;29(6):859–868. 32. Feijen EAM, Leisenring WM, Stratton KL, Ness KK, Van Der Pal HJH, Van Dalen EC, et al. Derivation of anthracycline and anthraquinone equivalence ratios to doxorubicin for late-onset cardiotoxicity. JAMA Oncol 2019;5:864–871. 33. Pareek N, Cevallos J, Moliner P, Shah M, Tan LL, Chambers V, et al. Activity and outcomes of a cardio-oncology service in the United Kingdom—a five-year experience. Eur J Heart Fail 2018;20:1721–1731. 34. Koene RJ, Prizment AE, Blaes A, Konety SH. Shared risk factors in cardiovascular disease and cancer. Circulation 2016;133:1104–1114. 35. Caocci G, Mulas O, Abruzzese E, Luciano L, Iurlo A, Attolico I, et al. Arterial occlusive events in chronic myeloid leukemia patients treated with ponatinib in the reallife practice are predicted by the Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE) chart. Hematol Oncol 2019;37:296–302. 36. Libby P, Sidlow R, Lin AE, Gupta D, Jones LW, Moslehi J, et al. Clonal hematopoiesis: crossroads of aging, cardiovascular disease, and cancer: JACC review topic of the week. J Am Coll Cardiol 2019;74:567–577. 37. Garcia-Pavia P, Kim Y, Restrepo-Cordoba MA, Lunde IG, Wakimoto H, Smith AM, et al. Genetic variants associated with cancer therapy-induced cardiomyopathy. Circulation 2019;140:31–41. 38. Bhatia S. Genetics of anthracycline cardiomyopathy in cancer survivors. JACC CardioOncology 2020;2:539–552. 39. Katzke VA, Kaaks R, Kühn T. Lifestyle and cancer risk. Cancer J 2015;21:104–110. 40. Sharifi-Rad J, Rodrigues CF, Sharopov F, Docea AO, Karaca AC, Sharifi-Rad M, et al. Diet, lifestyle and cardiovascular diseases: linking pathophysiology to cardioprotective effects of natural bioactive compounds. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2020;17: 2326. 41. Turner MC, Andersen ZJ, Baccarelli A, Diver WR, Gapstur SM, Pope CA, et al. Outdoor air pollution and cancer: an overview of the current evidence and public health recommendations. CA Cancer J Clin 2020;70 :460–479. 42. Lind PM, Lind L. Are persistent organic pollutants linked to lipid abnormalities, atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease? A review. J Lipid Atheroscler 2020;9: 334–348. 43. Zamorano JL, Gottfridsson C, Asteggiano R, Atar D, Badimon L, Bax JJ, et al. The cancer patient and cardiology. Eur J Heart Fail 2020;22:2290–2309. 44. Fradley MG, Moslehi J. QT prolongation and oncology drug development. Card Electrophysiol Clin 2015;7:341–355. 45. Porta-Sánchez A, Gilbert C, Spears D, Amir E, Chan J, Nanthakumar K, et al. Incidence, diagnosis, and management of QT prolongation induced by cancer therapies: a systematic review. J Am Heart Assoc 2017;6:e007724. 46. Curigliano G, Spitaleri G, Fingert HJ, de Braud F, Sessa C, Loh E, et al. Drug-induced QTc interval prolongation: a proposal towards an efficient and safe anticancer drug development. Eur J Cancer 2008;44:494–500. 47. Viganego F, Singh R, Fradley MG. Arrhythmias and other electrophysiology issues in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy or radiation. Curr Cardiol Rep 2016;18:52. 48. Curigliano G, Spitaleri G, De Braud F, Cardinale D, Cipolla C, Civelli M, et al. QTc prolongation assessment in anticancer drug development: clinical and methodological issues. Ecancermedicalscience 2009;3:130. 49. Salem J-E, Nguyen LS, Moslehi JJ, Ederhy S, Lebrun-Vignes B, Roden DM, et al. Anticancer drug-induced life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias: a World Health Organization pharmacovigilance study. Eur Heart J 2021;42:3915–3928. 50. Lentz R, Feinglass J, Ma S, Akhter N. Risk factors for the development of atrial fibrillation on ibrutinib treatment. Leuk Lymphoma 2019;60:1447–1453. 51. Mato AR, Clasen S, Pickens P, Gashonia L, Rhodes J, Svoboda J, et al. Left atrial abnormality (LAA) as a predictor of ibrutinib-associated atrial fibrillation in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Cancer Biol Ther 2018;19:1–2. 52. Singla A, Hogan WJ, Ansell SM, Buadi FK, Dingli D, Dispenzieri A, et al. Incidence of supraventricular arrhythmias during autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2013;19:1233–1237. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

53. Pudil R, Mueller C, Čelutkienė J, Henriksen PA, Lenihan D, Dent S, et al. Role of serum biomarkers in cancer patients receiving cardiotoxic cancer therapies: a position statement from the Cardio-Oncology Study Group of the Heart Failure Association and the Cardio-Oncology Council of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur J Heart Fail 2020;22:1966–1983. 54. Čelutkienė J, Pudil R, López-Fernández T, Grapsa J, Nihoyannopoulos P, Bergler-Klein J, et al. Role of cardiovascular imaging in cancer patients receiving cardiotoxic therapies: a position statement on behalf of the Heart Failure Association (HFA), the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI) and the Cardio-Oncology Council of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur J Heart Fail 2020;22:1504–1524. 55. Michel L, Mincu RI, Mahabadi AA, Settelmeier S, Al-Rashid F, Rassaf T, et al. Troponins and brain natriuretic peptides for the prediction of cardiotoxicity in cancer patients: a meta-analysis. Eur J Heart Fail 2020;22:350–361. 56. Lipshultz SE, Miller TL, Scully RE, Lipsitz SR, Rifai N, Silverman LB, et al. Changes in cardiac biomarkers during doxorubicin treatment of pediatric patients with highrisk acute lymphoblastic leukemia: associations with long-term echocardiographic outcomes. J Clin Oncol 2012;30:1042–1049. 57. Lipshultz SE, Rifai N, Dalton VM, Levy DE, Silverman LB, Lipsitz SR, et al. The effect of dexrazoxane on myocardial injury in doxorubicin-treated children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia. N Engl J Med 2004;351:145–153. 58. Xue K, Gu JJ, Zhang Q, Liu X, Wang J, Li XQ, et al. Cardiotoxicity as indicated by LVEF and troponin T sensitivity following two anthracycline-based regimens in lymphoma: results from a randomized prospective clinical trial. Oncotarget 2016; 7:32519–32531. 59. Cardinale D, Sandri MT, Colombo A, Colombo N, Boeri M, Lamantia G, et al. Prognostic value of troponin I in cardiac risk stratification of cancer patients undergoing high-dose chemotherapy. Circulation 2004;109:2749–2754. 60. Putt M, Hahn VS, Januzzi JL, Sawaya H, Sebag IA, Plana JC, et al. Longitudinal changes in multiple biomarkers are associated with cardiotoxicity in breast cancer patients treated with doxorubicin, taxanes, and trastuzumab. Clin Chem 2015;61: 1164–1172. 61. Cardinale D, Colombo A, Torrisi R, Sandri MT, Civelli M, Salvatici M, et al. Trastuzumab-induced cardiotoxicity: clinical and prognostic implications of troponin I evaluation. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:3910–3916. 62. Zardavas D, Suter TM, Van Veldhuisen DJ, Steinseifer J, Noe J, Lauer S, et al. Role of troponins I and T and N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide in monitoring cardiac safety of patients with early-stage human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer receiving trastuzumab: a herceptin adjuvant study cardiac marker substudy. J Clin Oncol 2017;35:878–884. 63. Mueller C, McDonald K, de Boer RA, Maisel A, Cleland JGF, Kozhuharov N, et al. Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology practical guidance on the use of natriuretic peptide concentrations. Eur J Heart Fail 2019;21:715–731. 64. Feola M, Garrone O, Occelli M, Francini A, Biggi A, Visconti G, et al. Cardiotoxicity after anthracycline chemotherapy in breast carcinoma: effects on left ventricular ejection fraction, troponin I and brain natriuretic peptide. Int J Cardiol 2011;148: 194–198. 65. Demissei BG, Hubbard RA, Zhang L, Smith AM, Sheline K, McDonald C, et al. Changes in cardiovascular biomarkers with breast cancer therapy and associations with cardiac dysfunction. J Am Heart Assoc 2020;9:e014708. 66. Cornell RF, Ky B, Weiss BM, Dahm CN, Gupta DK, Du L, et al. Prospective study of cardiac events during proteasome inhibitor therapy for relapsed multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol 2019;37:1946–1955. 67. Pavo N, Raderer M, Hülsmann M, Neuhold S, Adlbrecht C, Strunk G, et al. Cardiovascular biomarkers in patients with cancer and their association with allcause mortality. Heart 2015;101:1874–1880. 68. López-Sendón J, Álvarez-Ortega C, Zamora Auñon P, Buño Soto A, Lyon AR, Farmakis D, et al. Classification, prevalence, and outcomes of anticancer therapy-induced cardiotoxicity: the CARDIOTOX registry. Eur Heart J 2020;41: 1720–1729. 69. Ky B, Putt M, Sawaya H, French B, Januzzi JL, Sebag IA, et al. Early increases in multiple biomarkers predict subsequent cardiotoxicity in patients with breast cancer treated with doxorubicin, taxanes, and trastuzumab. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014;63: 809–816. 70. Gioffré S, Chiesa M, Cardinale DM, Ricci V, Vavassori C, Cipolla CM, et al. Circulating microRNAs as potential predictors of anthracycline-induced troponin elevation in breast cancer patients: diverging effects of doxorubicin and epirubicin. J Clin Med 2020;9:1418. 71. Beer LA, Kossenkov AV, Liu Q, Luning Prak E, Domchek S, Speicher DW, et al. Baseline immunoglobulin e levels as a marker of doxorubicinand trastuzumab-associated cardiac dysfunction. Circ Res 2016;119:1135–1144. 72. Plana JC, Thavendiranathan P, Bucciarelli-Ducci C, Lancellotti P. Multi-modality imaging in the assessment of cardiovascular toxicity in the cancer patient. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2018;11:1173–1186. 73. Galderisi M, Cosyns B, Edvardsen T, Cardim N, Delgado V, Di Salvo G, et al. Standardization of adult transthoracic echocardiography reporting in agreement with recent chamber quantification, diastolic function, and heart valve disease recommendations: an expert consensus document of the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 2017;18:1301–1310. 74. De Azambuja E, Procter MJ, Van Veldhuisen DJ, Agbor-Tarh D, Metzger-Filho O, Steinseifer J, et al. Trastuzumab-associated cardiac events at 8 years of median follow-up in the herceptin adjuvant trial (BIG 1-01). J Clin Oncol 2014;32: 2159–2165. 75. Santoro C, Arpino G, Esposito R, Lembo M, Paciolla I, Cardalesi C, et al. 2D and 3D strain for detection of subclinical anthracycline cardiotoxicity in breast cancer patients: A balance with feasibility. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 2017;18:930–936. 76. Zhang KW, Finkelman BS, Gulati G, Narayan HK, Upshaw J, Narayan V, et al. Abnormalities in 3-dimensional left ventricular mechanics with anthracycline chemotherapy are associated with systolic and diastolic dysfunction. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2018;11:1059–1068. 77. Lang RM, Badano LP, Mor-Avi V, Afilalo J, Armstrong A, Ernande L, et al. Recommendations for cardiac chamber quantification by echocardiography in adults: an update from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 2015;16:233–270. 78. Thavendiranathan P, Grant AD, Negishi T, Plana JC, Popović ZB, Marwick TH. Reproducibility of echocardiographic techniques for sequential assessment of left ventricular ejection fraction and volumes: application to patients undergoing cancer chemotherapy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;61:77–84. 79. Dorosz JL, Lezotte DC, Weitzenkamp DA, Allen LA, Salcedo EE. Performance of 3-dimensional echocardiography in measuring left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;59: 1799–1808. 80. Hoffmann R, Barletta G, Von Bardeleben S, Vanoverschelde JL, Kasprzak J, Greis C, et al. Analysis of left ventricular volumes and function: a multicenter comparison of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, cine ventriculography, and unenhanced and contrast-enhanced two-dimensional and three-dimensional echocardiography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2014;27:292–301. 81. Jenkins C, Moir S, Chan J, Rakhit D, Haluska B, Marwick TH. Left ventricular volume measurement with echocardiography: a comparison of left ventricular opacification, three-dimensional echocardiography, or both with magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Heart J 2009;30:98–106. 82. Porter TR, Mulvagh SL, Abdelmoneim SS, Becher H, Belcik JT, Bierig M, et al. Clinical applications of ultrasonic enhancing agents in echocardiography: 2018 American Society of Echocardiography Guidelines Update. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2018;31: 241–274. 83. Houbois CP, Nolan M, Somerset E, Shalmon T, Esmaeilzadeh M, Lamacie MM, et al. Serial cardiovascular magnetic resonance strain measurements to identify cardiotoxicity in breast cancer: comparison with echocardiography. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2021;14:962–974. 84. Dobbin SJH, Mangion K, Berry C, Roditi G, Basak S, Sourbron S, et al. Cardiotoxicity and myocardial hypoperfusion associated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapies: prospective cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in patients with cancer. Eur J Heart Fail 2020;22:1276–1277. 85. Mousavi N, Tan TC, Ali M, Halpern EF, Wang L, Scherrer-Crosbie M. Echocardiographic parameters of left ventricular size and function as predictors of symptomatic heart failure in patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction of 50–59% treated with anthracyclines. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 2015;16: 977–984. 86. Čelutkienė J, Plymen CM, Flachskampf FA, de Boer RA, Grapsa J, Manka R, et al. Innovative imaging methods in heart failure: a shifting paradigm in cardiac assessment. Position statement on behalf of the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur J Heart Fail 2018;20:1615–1633. 87. Kalam K, Otahal P, Marwick TH. Prognostic implications of global LV dysfunction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of global longitudinal strain and ejection fraction. Heart 2014;100:1673–1680. 88. Baron T, Berglund L, Hedin EM, Flachskampf FA. Test–retest reliability of new and conventional echocardiographic parameters of left ventricular systolic function. Clin Res Cardiol 2019;108:355–365. 89. Lambert J, Lamacie M, Thampinathan B, Altaha MA, Esmaeilzadeh M, Nolan M, et al. Variability in echocardiography and MRI for detection of cancer therapy cardiotoxicity. Heart 2020;106:817–823. 90. Thavendiranathan P, Negishi T, Coté MA, Penicka M, Massey R, Cho GY, et al. Single versus standard multiview assessment of global longitudinal strain for the diagnosis of cardiotoxicity during cancer therapy. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2018; 11:1109–1118. 91. Negishi K, Negishi T, Haluska BA, Hare JL, Plana JC, Marwick TH. Use of speckle strain to assess left ventricular responses to cardiotoxic chemotherapy and cardioprotection. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 2014;15:324–331. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

92. Thavendiranathan P, Poulin F, Lim KD, Plana JC, Woo A, Marwick TH. Use of myocardial strain imaging by echocardiography for the early detection of cardiotoxicity in patients during and after cancer chemotherapy: a systematic review. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014;63:2751–2768. 93. Oikonomou EK, Kokkinidis DG, Kampaktsis PN, Amir EA, Marwick TH, Gupta D, et al. Assessment of prognostic value of left ventricular global longitudinal strain for early prediction of chemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Cardiol 2019;4:1007–1018. 94. Plana JC, Galderisi M, Barac A, Ewer MS, Ky B, Scherrer-Crosbie M, et al. Expert consensus for multimodality imaging evaluation of adult patients during and after cancer therapy: a report from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 2014;15:1063–1093. 95. Farsalinos KE, Daraban AM, Ünlü S, Thomas JD, Badano LP, Voigt JU. Head-to-head comparison of global longitudinal strain measurements among nine different vendors: the EACVI/ASE inter-vendor comparison study. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2015;28:1171–1181.e2. 96. Narayan HK, French B, Khan AM, Plappert T, Hyman D, Bajulaiye A, et al. Noninvasive measures of ventricular–arterial coupling and circumferential strain predict cancer therapeutics–related cardiac dysfunction. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2016;9:1131–1141. 97. Nagiub M, Nixon JV, Kontos MC. Ability of nonstrain diastolic parameters to predict doxorubicin-induced cardiomyopathy: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Cardiol Rev 2018;26:29–34. 98. Upshaw JN, Finkelman B, Hubbard RA, Smith AM, Narayan HK, Arndt L, et al. Comprehensive assessment of changes in left ventricular diastolic function with contemporary breast cancer therapy. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2020;13:198–210. 99. Phillips WJ, Johnson C, Law A, Turek M, Small AR, Dent S, et al. Comparison of Framingham risk score and chest-CT identified coronary artery calcification in breast cancer patients to predict cardiovascular events. Int J Cardiol 2019;289: 138–143. 100. Knuuti J, Wijns W, Saraste A, Capodanno D, Barbato E, Funck-Brentano C, et al. 2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of chronic coronary syndromes: The Task Force for the diagnosis and management of chronic coronary syndromes of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J 2020;41: 407–477. 101. Lopez-Mattei JC, Yang EH, Ferencik M, Baldassarre LA, Dent S, Budoff MJ. Cardiac computed tomography in cardio-oncology: JACC: CardioOncology primer. Cardio Oncol 2021;3:635–649. 102. Thavendiranathan P, Negishi T, Somerset E, Negishi K, Penicka M, Lemieux J, et al. Strain-guided management of potentially cardiotoxic cancer therapy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2021;77:392–401. 103. Esmaeilzadeh M, Fresno CMU, Somerset E, Shalmon T, Amir E, Fan CPS, et al. A combined echocardiography approach for the diagnosis of cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction in women with early-stage breast cancer. JAMA Cardiol 2022;7: 330–340. 104. Drafts BC, Twomley KM, D’Agostino R, Lawrence J, Avis N, Ellis LR, et al. Low to moderate dose anthracycline-based chemotherapy is associated with early noninvasive imaging evidence of subclinical cardiovascular disease. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2013;6:877–885. 105. Giusca S, Korosoglou G, Montenbruck M, Geršak B, Schwarz AK, Esch S, et al. Multiparametric early detection and prediction of cardiotoxicity using myocardial strain, T1 and T2 mapping, and biochemical markers: a longitudinal cardiac resonance imaging study during 2 years of follow-up. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2021;14:e012459. 106. Dhir V, Yan AT, Nisenbaum R, Sloninko J, Connelly KA, Barfett J, et al. Assessment of left ventricular function by CMR versus MUGA scans in breast cancer patients receiving trastuzumab: a prospective observational study. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2019;35:2085–2093. 107. Walker J, Bhullar N, Fallah-Rad N, Lytwyn M, Golian M, Fang T, et al. Role of threedimensional echocardiography in breast cancer: comparison with two-dimensional echocardiography, multiple-gated acquisition scans, and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:3429–3436. 108. Huang H, Nijjar PS, Misialek JR, Blaes A, Derrico NP, Kazmirczak F, et al. Accuracy of left ventricular ejection fraction by contemporary multiple gated acquisition scanning in patients with cancer: comparison with cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2017;19:34. 109. Hoppeler H, Weibel ER. Limits for oxygen and substrate transport in mammals. J Exp Biol 1998;201:1051–1064. 110. Kaminsky LA, Imboden MT, Arena R, Myers J. Reference standards for cardiorespiratory fitness measured with cardiopulmonary exercise testing using cycle ergometry: data from the Fitness Registry and the Importance of Exercise National Database (FRIEND) registry. Mayo Clin Proc 2017;92:228–233. 111. Imboden MT, Harber MP, Whaley MH, Finch WH, Bishop DL, Kaminsky LA. Cardiorespiratory fitness and mortality in healthy men and women. J Am Coll Cardiol 2018;72:2283–2292. 112. Jetté M, Sidney K, Blümchen G. Metabolic equivalents (METS) in exercise testing, exercise prescription, and evaluation of functional capacity. Clin Cardiol 1990;13: 555–565. 113. Ross R, Blair SN, Arena R, Church TS, Després JP, Franklin BA, et al. Importance of assessing cardiorespiratory fitness in clinical practice: a case for fitness as a clinical vital sign: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2016;134:e653–e699. 114. Schmid D, Leitzmann MF. Cardiorespiratory fitness as predictor of cancer mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Oncol 2015;26:272–278. 115. Gupta S, Rohatgi A, Ayers CR, Willis BL, Haskell WL, Khera A, et al. Cardiorespiratory fitness and classification of risk of cardiovascular disease mortality. Circulation 2011;123:1377–1383. 116. Holtermann A, Marott JL, Gyntelberg F, Søgaard K, Mortensen OS, Prescott E, et al. Self-reported cardiorespiratory fitness: prediction and classification of risk of cardiovascular disease mortality and longevity—a prospective investigation in the Copenhagen City Heart Study. J Am Heart Assoc 2015;4:e001495. 117. Stamatakis E, Hamer M, O’Donovan G, Batty GD, Kivimaki M. A non-exercise testing method for estimating cardiorespiratory fitness: associations with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in a pooled analysis of eight population-based cohorts. Eur Heart J 2013;34:750–758. 118. Wickramasinghe CD, Ayers CR, Das S, De Lemos JA, Willis BL, Berry JD. Prediction of 30-year risk for cardiovascular mortality by fitness and risk factor levels: the Cooper Center Longitudinal Study. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2014;7: 597–602. 119. Fardman A, Banschick GD, Rabia R, Percik R, Fourey D, Segev S, et al. Cardiorespiratory fitness and survival following cancer diagnosis. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2021;28:1242–1249. 120. Groarke JD, Payne DL, Claggett B, Mehra MR, Gong J, Caron J, et al. Association of post-diagnosis cardiorespiratory fitness with cause-specific mortality in cancer. Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes 2020;6:315–322. 121. Jones LM, Stoner L, Brown C, Baldi JC, McLaren B. Cardiorespiratory fitness predicts cardiovascular health in breast cancer survivors, independent of body composition, age and time post-treatment completion. Breast Cancer 2019;26: 729–737. 122. Ha D, Mazzone PJ, Ries AL, Malhotra A, Fuster M. The utility of exercise testing in patients with lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol 2016;11:1397–1410. 123. West MA, Lythgoe D, Barben CP, Noble L, Kemp GJ, Jack S, et al. Cardiopulmonary exercise variables are associated with postoperative morbidity after major colonic surgery: a prospective blinded observational study. Br J Anaesth 2014;112:665–671. 124. West MA, Parry MG, Lythgoe D, Barben CP, Kemp GJ, Grocott MPW, et al. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing for the prediction of morbidity risk after rectal cancer surgery. Br J Surg 2014;101:1166–1172. 125. Halvorsen S, Mehilli J, Cassese S, Hall TS, Abdelhamid M, Barbato E, et al. 2022 ESC guidelines on cardiovascular assessment and management of patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. Eur Heart J 2022;43:3826–3924. 126. Aminkeng F, Bhavsar AP, Visscher H, Rassekh SR, Li Y, Lee JW, et al. A coding variant in RARG confers susceptibility to anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity in childhood cancer. Nat Genet 2015;47:1079–1084. 127. Blanco JG, Sun CL, Landier W, Chen L, Esparza-Duran D, Leisenring W, et al. Anthracycline-related cardiomyopathy after childhood cancer: role of polymorphisms in carbonyl reductase genes—a report from the Children’s Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol 2012;30:1415–1421. 128. Wojnowski L, Kulle B, Schirmer M, Schlüter G, Schmidt A, Rosenberger A, et al. NAD(P)H oxidase and multidrug resistance protein genetic polymorphisms are associated with doxorubicin-induced cardiotoxicity. Circulation 2005;112: 3754–3762. 129. Johnson DB, Balko JM, Compton ML, Chalkias S, Gorham J, Xu Y, et al. Fulminant myocarditis with combination immune checkpoint blockade. N Engl J Med 2016; 375:1749–1755. 130. European Society of Cardiology. ESC CardioMed. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2018. 131. Moslehi JJ. Cardiovascular toxic effects of targeted cancer therapies. N Engl J Med 2016;375:1457–1467. 132. Ameri P, Canepa M, Anker MS, Belenkov Y, Bergler-Klein J, Cohen-Solal A, et al. Cancer diagnosis in patients with heart failure: epidemiology, clinical implications and gaps in knowledge. Eur J Heart Fail 2018;20:879–887. 133. D’Ascenzi F, Anselmi F, Fiorentini C, Mannucci R, Bonifazi M, Mondillo S. The benefits of exercise in cancer patients and the criteria for exercise prescription in cardio-oncology. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2021;28:725–735. 134. Ogunmoroti O, Allen NB, Cushman M, Michos ED, Rundek T, Rana JS, et al. Association between life’s simple 7 and noncardiovascular disease: the multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis. J Am Heart Assoc 2016;5:e003954. 135. Michos ED, Marshall CH. Healthy lifestyle benefits both cancer and cardiovascular disease: more bang for the buck. JACC CardioOncology 2021;3:675–677. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

136. Murray J, Bennett H, Bezak E, Perry R. The role of exercise in the prevention of cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction in breast cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy: systematic review. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2022;29:463–472. 137. Scott JM, Nilsen TS, Gupta D, Jones LW. Exercise therapy and cardiovascular toxicity in cancer. Circulation 2018;137:1176–1191. 138. Williams B, Mancia G, Spiering W, Rosei EA, Azizi M, Burnier M, et al. 2018 ESC/ ESH Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension. Eur Heart J 2018; 39:3021–3104. 139. Cosentino F, Grant PJ, Aboyans V, Bailey CJ, Ceriello A, Delgado V, et al. 2019 ESC Guidelines on diabetes, pre-diabetes, and cardiovascular diseases developed in collaboration with the EASD. Eur Heart J 2020;41:255–323. 140. Mach F, Baigent C, Catapano AL, Koskinas KC, Casula M, Badimon L, et al. 2019 ESC/EAS Guidelines for the management of dyslipidaemias: lipid modification to reduce cardiovascular risk. Eur Heart J 2020;41:111–188. 141. Beavers CJ, Rodgers JE, Bagnola AJ, Beckie TM, Campia U, Di Palo KE, et al. Cardio-oncology drug interactions: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2022;145:e811–e838. 142. Ferdinandy P, Baczkó I, Bencsik P, Giricz Z, Görbe A, Pacher P, et al. Definition of hidden drug cardiotoxicity: paradigm change in cardiac safety testing and its clinical implications. Eur Heart J 2019;40:1771–1777. 143. Kalam K, Marwick TH. Role of cardioprotective therapy for prevention of cardiotoxicity with chemotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Cancer 2013;49:2900–2909. 144. Chen J, Long JB, Hurria A, Owusu C, Steingart RM, Gross CP. Incidence of heart failure or cardiomyopathy after adjuvant trastuzumab therapy for breast cancer. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;60:2504–2512. 145. Bosch X, Rovira M, Sitges M, Domènech A, Ortiz-Pérez JT, De Caralt TM, et al. Enalapril and carvedilol for preventing chemotherapy-induced left ventricular systolic dysfunction in patients with malignant hemopathies: the OVERCOME trial (preventiOn of left Ventricular dysfunction with Enalapril and caRvedilol in patients submitted to intensive ChemOtherapy for the treatment of Malignant hEmopathies). J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;61:2355–2362. 146. Avila MS, Ayub-Ferreira SM, de Barros Wanderley MR, das Dores Cruz F, Gonçalves Brandão SM, Rigaud VOC, et al. Carvedilol for prevention of chemotherapy-related cardiotoxicity: the CECCY trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2018;71: 2281–2290. 147. Cardinale D, Ciceri F, Latini R, Franzosi MG, Sandri MT, Civelli M, et al. Anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity: a multicenter randomised trial comparing two strategies for guiding prevention with enalapril: The International CardioOncology Society-one trial. Eur J Cancer 2018;94:126–137. 148. Akpek M, Ozdogru I, Sahin O, Inanc M, Dogan A, Yazici C, et al. Protective effects of spironolactone against anthracycline-induced cardiomyopathy. Eur J Heart Fail 2015;17:81–89. 149. Acar Z, Kale A, Turgut M, Demircan S, Durna K, Demir S, et al. Efficiency of atorvastatin in the protection of anthracycline-induced cardiomyopathy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011;58:988–989. 150. Gulati G, Heck SL, Ree AH, Hoffmann P, Schulz-Menger J, Fagerland MW, et al. Prevention of cardiac dysfunction during adjuvant breast cancer therapy (PRADA): a 2 × 2 factorial, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial of candesartan and metoprolol. Eur Heart J 2016;37:1671–1680. 151. Gulati G, Heck SL, Røsjø H, Ree AH, Hoffmann P, Hagve TA, et al. Neurohormonal blockade and circulating cardiovascular biomarkers during anthracycline therapy in breast cancer patients: results from the PRADA (Prevention of Cardiac Dysfunction During Adjuvant Breast Cancer Therapy) study. J Am Heart Assoc 2017;6:e006513. 152. Guglin M, Krischer J, Tamura R, Fink A, Bello-Matricaria L, McCaskill-Stevens W, et al. Randomized trial of lisinopril versus carvedilol to prevent trastuzumab cardiotoxicity in patients with breast cancer. J Am Coll Cardiol 2019;73:2859–2868. 153. Pituskin E, Mackey JR, Koshman S, Jassal D, Pitz M, Haykowsky MJ, et al. Multidisciplinary approach to novel therapies in cardio-oncology research (MANTICORE 101-Breast): a randomized trial for the prevention of trastuzumab-associated cardiotoxicity. J Clin Oncol 2017;35:870–877. 154. Boekhout AH, Gietema JA, Kerklaan BM, VanWerkhoven ED, Altena R, Honkoop A, et al. Angiotensin II receptor inhibition with candesartan to prevent trastuzumab-related cardiotoxic effects in patients with early breast cancer a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol 2016;2:1030–1037. 155. Caspani F, Tralongo AC, Campiotti L, Asteggiano R, Guasti L, Squizzato A. Prevention of anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Intern Emerg Med 2021;16:477–486. 156. Huang S, Zhao Q, Yang ZG, Diao KY, He Y, Shi K, et al. Protective role of betablockers in chemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity—a systematic review and meta-analysis of carvedilol. Heart Fail Rev 2019;24:325–333. 157. Vaduganathan M, Hirji SA, Qamar A, Bajaj N, Gupta A, Zaha VG, et al. Efficacy of neurohormonal therapies in preventing cardiotoxicity in patients with cancer undergoing chemotherapy. JACC CardioOncology 2019;1:54–65. 158. Macedo AVS, Hajjar LA, Lyon AR, Nascimento BR, Putzu A, Rossi L, et al. Efficacy of dexrazoxane in preventing anthracycline cardiotoxicity in breast cancer. JACC CardioOncology 2019;1:68–79. 159. Li X, Li Y, Zhang T, Xiong X, Liu N, Pang B, et al. Role of cardioprotective agents on chemotherapy-induced heart failure: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Pharmacol Res 2020;151:104577. 160. Fang K, Zhang Y, Liu W, He C. Effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/ angiotensin receptor blocker use on cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Heart Fail Rev 2021;26:101–109. 161. Shapira J, Gotfried M, Lishner M, Ravid M. Reduced cardiotoxicity of doxorubicin by a 6-hour infusion regimen. A prospective randomized evaluation. Cancer 1990;65: 870–873. 162. Hensley ML, Hagerty KL, Kewalramani T, Green DM, Meropol NJ, Wasserman TH, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology 2008 clinical practice guideline update: use of chemotherapy and radiation therapy protectants. J Clin Oncol 2009;27: 127–145. 163. European Medicines Agency. Savene: EPAR—Product Information (Internet) 2008 (updated 2019). 164. Vejpongsa P, Yeh ETH. Prevention of anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity: challenges and opportunities. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014;64:938–945. 165. Yamaguchi N, Fujii T, Aoi S, Kozuch PS, Hortobagyi GN, Blum RH. Comparison of cardiac events associated with liposomal doxorubicin, epirubicin and doxorubicin in breast cancer: a Bayesian network meta-analysis. Eur J Cancer 2015;51:2314–2320. 166. Swain SM, Whaley FS, Gerber MC, Ewer MS, Bianchine JR, Gams RA. Delayed administration of dexrazoxane provides cardioprotection for patients with advanced breast cancer treated with doxorubicin-containing therapy. J Clin Oncol 1997;15: 1333–1340. 167. van Dalen EC, Caron HN, Dickinson HO, Kremer LCM. Cardioprotective interventions for cancer patients receiving anthracyclines. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011;2011:CD003917. 168. Waterhouse DN, Tardi PG, Mayer LD, Bally MB. A comparison of liposomal formulations of doxorubicin with drug administered in free form: changing toxicity profiles. Drug Saf 2001;24:903–920. 169. Verellen D, De Ridder M, Linthout N, Tournel K, Soete G, Storme G. Innovations in image-guided radiotherapy. Nat Rev Cancer 2007;7:949–960. 170. De Ruysscher D, Niedermann G, Burnet NG, Siva S, Lee AWM, Hegi-Johnson F. Radiotherapy toxicity. Nat Rev Dis Prim 2019;5:13. 171. Meattini I, Poortmans PM, Aznar MC, Becherini C, Bonzano E, Cardinale D, et al. Association of breast cancer irradiation with cardiac toxic effects: a narrative review. JAMA Oncol 2021;7:924–932. 172. Banfill K, Giuliani M, Aznar M, Franks K, McWilliam A, Schmitt M, et al. Cardiac toxicity of thoracic radiotherapy: existing evidence and future directions. J Thorac Oncol 2021;16:216–227. 173. Mitchell JD, Cehic DA, Morgia M, Bergrom C, Toohey J, Guerrero PA, et al. Cardiovascular manifestations from therapeutic radiation: a multidisciplinary expert consensus statement from the International Cardio-Oncology Society. JACC CardioOncology 2021;3:360–380. 174. Kirwan CC, Coles CE, Bliss J, Kirwan C, Kilburn L, Fox L, et al. It’s PRIMETIME. Postoperative avoidance of radiotherapy: biomarker selection of women at very low risk of local recurrence. Clin Oncol 2016;28:594–596. 175. Cardinale D, Colombo A, Sandri MT, Lamantia G, Colombo N, Civelli M, et al. Prevention of high-dose chemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity in high-risk patients by angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition. Circulation 2006;114:2474–2481. 176. Abdel-Qadir H, Bobrowski D, Zhou L, Austin PC, Calvillo-Argüelles O, Amir E, et al. Statin exposure and risk of heart failure after anthracycline-or trastuzumabbased chemotherapy for early breast cancer: a propensity score⍰matched cohort study. J Am Heart Assoc 2021;10:e018393. 177. Calvillo-Argüelles O, Abdel-Qadir H, Michalowska M, Billia F, Suntheralingam S, Amir E, et al. Cardioprotective effect of statins in patients with HER2-positive breast cancer receiving trastuzumab therapy. Can J Cardiol 2019;35:153–159. 178. Seicean S, Seicean A, Plana JC, Budd GT, Marwick TH. Effect of statin therapy on the risk for incident heart failure in patients with breast cancer receiving anthracycline chemotherapy: an observational clinical cohort study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;60: 2384–2390. 179. Chotenimitkhun R, D’Agostino R, Lawrence JA, Hamilton CA, Jordan JH, Vasu S, et al. Chronic statin administration may attenuate early anthracycline-associated declines in left ventricular ejection function. Can J Cardiol 2015;31:302–307. 180. Obasi M, Abovich A, Vo JB, Gao Y, Papatheodorou SI, Nohria A, et al. Statins to mitigate cardiotoxicity in cancer patients treated with anthracyclines and/or trastuzumab: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Causes Control 2021;32: 1395–1405. 181. Kim J, Nishimura Y, Kewcharoen J, Yess J. Statin use can attenuate the decline in left ventricular ejection fraction and the incidence of cardiomyopathy in cardiotoxic chemotherapy recipients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Med 2021; 10:3731. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

182. Sanfilippo KM, Keller J, Gage BF, Luo S, Wang TF, Moskowitz G, et al. Statins are associated with reduced mortality in multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol 2016;34: 4008–4014. 183. Afzal A, Fiala MA, Gage BF, Wildes TM, Sanfilippo K. Statins reduce mortality in multiple myeloma: a population-based US study. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk 2020;20:e937–e943. 184. Nabati M, Janbabai G, Esmailian J, Yazdani J. Effect of rosuvastatin in preventing chemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity in women with breast cancer: a randomized, single-blind, placebo-controlled trial. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol Ther 2019;24:233–241. 185. Shahid I, Yamani N, Ali A, Kumar P, Figueredo V, Unzek S, et al. Meta-analysis evaluating the use of statins to attenuate cardiotoxicity in cancer patients receiving anthracyclines and trastuzumab-based chemotherapy. Am J Cardiol 2021;156: 142–145. 186. Nabati M, Janbabai G, Baghyari S, Esmaili K, Yazdani J. Cardioprotective effects of carvedilol in inhibiting doxorubicin-induced cardiotoxicity. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 2017;69:279–285. 187. Warrington L, Absolom K, Conner M, Kellar I, Clayton B, Ayres M, et al. Electronic systems for patients to report and manage side effects of cancer treatment: systematic review. J Med Internet Res 2019;21:e10875. 188. López-Fernández T, Martín García A, Santaballa Beltrán A, Montero Luis Á, García Sanz R, Mazón Ramos P, et al. Cardio-onco-hematology in clinical practice. Position paper and recommendations. Rev Española Cardiol (English Ed) 2017;70:474–486. 189. Lynce F, Barac A, Geng X, Dang C, Yu AF, Smith KL, et al. Prospective evaluation of the cardiac safety of HER2-targeted therapies in patients with HER2-positive breast cancer and compromised heart function: the SAFE-HEaRt study. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2019;175:595–603. 190. Fornaro A, Olivotto I, Rigacci L, Ciaccheri M, Tomberli B, Ferrantini C, et al. Comparison of long-term outcome in anthracycline-related versus idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy: a single centre experience. Eur J Heart Fail 2018;20:898–906. 191. Chow SL, Maisel AS, Anand I, Bozkurt B, De Boer RA, Felker GM, et al. Role of biomarkers for the prevention, assessment, and management of heart failure: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2017;135: e1054–e1091. Erratum in: Circulation 2017;136:e345. 192. De Boer RA, Daniels LB, Maisel AS, Januzzi JL. State of the art: newer biomarkers in heart failure. Eur J Heart Fail 2015;17:559–569. 193. Piek A, Du W, de Boer RA, Silljé HHW. Novel heart failure biomarkers: why do we fail to exploit their potential? Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci 2018;55:246–263. 194. Du W, Piek A, Marloes Schouten E, van de Kolk CWA, Mueller C, Mebazaa A, et al. Plasma levels of heart failure biomarkers are primarily a reflection of extracardiac production. Theranostics 2018;8:4155–4169. 195. Suthahar N, Lau ES, Blaha MJ, Paniagua SM, Larson MG, Psaty BM, et al. Sex-specific associations of cardiovascular risk factors and biomarkers with incident heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol 2020;76:1455–1465. 196. Bracun V, Aboumsallem JP, van der Meer P, de Boer RA. Cardiac biomarkers in patients with cancer: considerations, clinical implications, and future avenues. Curr Oncol Rep 2020;22:67. 197. Ananthan K, Lyon AR. The role of biomarkers in cardio-oncology. J Cardiovasc Transl Res 2020;13:431–450. 198. López-Fernández T, Thavendiranathan P. Emerging cardiac imaging modalities for the early detection of cardiotoxicity due to anticancer therapies. Rev Española Cardiol (English Ed) 2017;70:487–495. 199. Eschenhagen T, Force T, Ewer MS, De Keulenaer GW, Suter TM, Anker SD, et al. Cardiovascular side effects of cancer therapies: a position statement from the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur J Heart Fail 2011;13:1–10. 200. Keramida K, Farmakis D, López Fernández T, Lancellotti P. Focused echocardiography in cardio-oncology. Echocardiography 2020;37:1149–1158. 201. Liu JE, Barac A, Thavendiranathan P, Scherrer-Crosbie M. Strain imaging in cardio-oncology. JACC CardioOncology 2020;2:677–689. 202. Negishi K, Negishi T, Hare JL, Haluska BA, Plana JC, Marwick TH. Independent and incremental value of deformation indices for prediction of trastuzumab-induced cardiotoxicity. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2013;26:493–498. 203. Negishi T, Thavendiranathan P, Penicka M, Lemieux J, Aakhus S, Miyazaki S, et al. Cardioprotection using strain-guided management of potentially cardiotoxic cancer therapy: 1 year results of the SUCCOUR trial. Eur Heart J 2020;41: ehaa946.3282. 204. Vallabhaneni S, Zhang KW, Alvarez JA, Joshua C, Henning DM, Woodard PK, et al. Role of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in early detection and treatment of cardiac dysfunction in oncology patients. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2021;37:3003–3017. 205. Lapinskas T, Hireche-Chikaoui H, Zieschang V, Erley J, Stehning C, Gebker R, et al. Effect of comprehensive initial training on the variability of left ventricular measures using fast-SENC cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. Sci Rep 2019;9:12223. 206. Korosoglou G, Giusca S, Montenbruck M, Patel AR, Lapinskas T, Götze C, et al. Fast strain-encoded cardiac magnetic resonance for diagnostic classification and risk stratification of heart failure patients. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2021;14:1177–1188. 207. Yancy CW, Jessup M, Bozkurt B, Butler J, Casey DE, Colvin MM, et al. 2017 ACC/ AHA/HFSA focused update of the 2013 ACCF/AHA guideline for the management of heart failure: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines and the Heart Failure Society of America. Circulation 2017;136:e137–e161. 208. Cardinale D, Colombo A, Bacchiani G, Tedeschi I, Meroni CA, Veglia F, et al. Early detection of anthracycline cardiotoxicity and improvement with heart failure therapy. Circulation 2015;131:1981–1988. 209. Wang L, Tan TC, Halpern EF, Neilan TG, Francis SA, Picard MH, et al. Major cardiac events and the value of echocardiographic evaluation in patients receiving anthracycline-based chemotherapy. Am J Cardiol 2015;116:442–446. 210. Abu-Khalaf MM, Safonov A, Stratton J, Wang S, Hatzis C, Park E, et al. Examining the cost-effectiveness of baseline left ventricular function assessment among breast cancer patients undergoing anthracycline-based therapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2019;176:261–270. 211. Lenihan DJ, Stevens PL, Massey M, Plana JC, Araujo DM, Fanale MA, et al. The utility of point-of-care biomarkers to detect cardiotoxicity during anthracycline chemotherapy: a feasibility study. J Card Fail 2016;22:433–438. 212. Meessen JMTA, Cardinale D, Ciceri F, Sandri MT, Civelli M, Bottazzi B, et al. Circulating biomarkers and cardiac function over 3 years after chemotherapy with anthracyclines: the ICOS-ONE trial. ESC Heart Fail 2020;7:1452–1466. 213. Jones M, O’Gorman P, Kelly C, Mahon N, Fitzgibbon MC. High-sensitive cardiac troponin-I facilitates timely detection of subclinical anthracycline-mediated cardiac injury. Ann Clin Biochem 2017;54:149–157. 214. Brandão M, Pondé NF, Poggio F, Kotecki N, Salis M, Lambertini M, et al. Combination therapies for the treatment of HER2-positive breast cancer: current and future prospects. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 2018;18:629–649. 215. Yarden Y, Sliwkowski MX. Untangling the ErbB signalling network. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2001;2:127–137. 216. Belmonte F, Das S, Sysa-Shah P, Sivakumaran V, Stanley B, Guo X, et al. ErbB2 overexpression upregulates antioxidant enzymes, reduces basal levels of reactive oxygen species, and protects against doxorubicin cardiotoxicity. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 2015;309:H1271–H1280. 217. Martel S, Maurer C, Lambertini M, Pondé N, De Azambuja E. Breast cancer treatment-induced cardiotoxicity. Expert Opin Drug Saf 2017;16:1021–1038. 218. de Azambuja E, Ponde N, Procter M, Rastogi P, Cecchini RS, Lambertini M, et al. A pooled analysis of the cardiac events in the trastuzumab adjuvant trials. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2020;179:161–171. 219. Eiger D, Pondé NF, Agbor-Tarh D, Moreno-Aspitia A, Piccart M, Hilbers FS, et al. Long-term cardiac outcomes of patients with HER2-positive breast cancer treated in the adjuvant lapatinib and/or trastuzumab treatment optimization trial. Br J Cancer 2020;122:1453–1460. 220. Tan-Chiu E, Yothers G, Romond E, Geyer CE, Ewer M, Keefe D, et al. Assessment of cardiac dysfunction in a randomized trial comparing doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel, with or without trastuzumab as adjuvant therapy in node-positive, HER2-overexpressing breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005;23: 7811–7819. 221. Martin M, Press M, Ph D, Mackey J, Glaspy J, Chan A, et al. Adjuvant trastuzumab in HER2-positive breast cancer. NEJM 2011;365:1273–1283. 222. Smith I, Procter M, Gelber RD, Guillaume S, Feyereislova A, Dowsett M, et al. 2-year follow-up of trastuzumab after adjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-positive breast cancer: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2007;369:29–36. 223. Piccart-Gebhart MJ, Procter M, Leyland-Jones B, Goldhirsch A, Untch M, Smith I, et al. Trastuzumab after adjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2005;353:1659–1672. 224. Romond EH, Perez EA, Bryant J, Suman VJ, Geyer CE, Davidson NE, et al. Trastuzumab plus adjuvant chemotherapy for operable HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2005;353:1673–1684. 225. Cameron D, Piccart-Gebhart MJ, Gelber RD, Procter M, Goldhirsch A, de Azambuja E, et al. 11 years’ follow-up of trastuzumab after adjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-positive early breast cancer: final analysis of the HERceptin Adjuvant (HERA) trial. Lancet 2017;389:1195–1205. 226. Tan TC, Bouras S, Sawaya H, Sebag IA, Cohen V, Picard MH, et al. Time trends of left ventricular ejection fraction and myocardial deformation indices in a cohort of women with breast cancer treated with anthracyclines, taxanes, and trastuzumab. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2015;28:509–514. 227. Ben Kridis W, Sghaier S, Charfeddine S, Toumi N, Daoud J, Kammoun S, et al. A prospective study about trastuzumab-induced cardiotoxicity in HER2-positive breast cancer. Am J Clin Oncol Cancer Clin Trials 2020;43:510–516. 228. Yang ZY, Wang W, Wang X, Qin ZQ. Cardiotoxicity of epidermal growth factor receptor 2-targeted drugs for breast cancer. Front Pharmacol 2021;12:741451. 229. Task Force Members, Montalescot G, Sechtem U, Achenbach S, Andreotti F, Arden C, et al. 2013 ESC guidelines on the management of stable coronary artery disease: the Task Force on the management of stable coronary artery disease of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J 2013;34:2949–3003. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

230. Padegimas A, Carver JR. How to diagnose and manage patients with fluoropyrimidine-induced chest pain: a single center approach. JACC CardioOncology 2020;2:650–654. 231. Kwakman JJM, Simkens LHJ, Mol L, Kok WEM, Koopman M, Punt CJA. Incidence of capecitabine-related cardiotoxicity in different treatment schedules of metastatic colorectal cancer: a retrospective analysis of the CAIRO studies of the Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group. Eur J Cancer 2017;76:93–99. 232. Frickhofen N, Beck FJ, Jung B, Fuhr HG, Andrasch H, Sigmund M. Capecitabine can induce acute coronary syndrome similar to 5-fluorouracil. Ann Oncol 2002;13: 797–801. 233. Polk A, Vistisen K, Vaage-Nilsen M, Nielsen DL. A systematic review of the pathophysiology of 5-fluorouracil-induced cardiotoxicity. BMC Pharmacol Toxicol 2014; 15:47. 234. Edvardsen T, Asch FM, Davidson B, Delgado V, DeMaria A, Dilsizian V, et al. Non-invasive imaging in coronary syndromes: recommendations of the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging and the American Society of Echocardiography, in collaboration with the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Society of Cardiovascular Comuted Tomography, and Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 2022;23: e6–e33. 235. Sara JD, Kaur J, Khodadadi R, Rehman M, Lobo R, Chakrabarti S, et al. 5-fluorouracil and cardiotoxicity: a review. Ther Adv Med Oncol 2018;10:1758835918780140. 236. Bair SM, Choueiri TK, Moslehi J. Cardiovascular complications associated with novel angiogenesis inhibitors: emerging evidence and evolving perspectives. Trends Cardiovasc Med 2013;23:104–113. 237. Choueiri TK, Schutz FAB, Je Y, Rosenberg JE, Bellmunt J. Risk of arterial thromboembolic events with sunitinib and sorafenib: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:2280–2285. 238. Shah RR, Morganroth J, Shah DR. Cardiovascular safety of tyrosine kinase inhibitors: With a special focus on cardiac repolarisation (QT interval). Drug Saf 2013; 36:295–316. 239. Abdel-Qadir H, Ethier JL, Lee DS, Thavendiranathan P, Amir E. Cardiovascular toxicity of angiogenesis inhibitors in treatment of malignancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Treat Rev 2017;53:120–127. 240. Desai A, Noor A, Joshi S, Kim AS. Takotsubo cardiomyopathy in cancer patients. Cardio-Oncology 2019;5:7. 241. Nazer B, Humphreys BD, Moslehi J. Effects of novel angiogenesis inhibitors for the treatment of cancer on the cardiovascular system: focus on hypertension. Circulation 2011;124:1687–1691. 242. Shah CP, Moreb JS. Cardiotoxicity due to targeted anticancer agents: a growing challenge. Ther Adv Cardiovasc Dis 2019;13:1753944719843435. 243. Azizi M, Chedid A, Oudard S. Home blood-pressure monitoring in patients receiving sunitinib. N Engl J Med 2008;358:95–97. 244. Hamnvik OPR, Choueiri TK, Turchin A, McKay RR, Goyal L, Davis M, et al. Clinical risk factors for the development of hypertension in patients treated with inhibitors of the VEGF signaling pathway. Cancer 2015;121:311–319. 245. Ghatalia P, Morgan CJ, Je Y, Nguyen PL, Trinh QD, Choueiri TK, et al. Congestive heart failure with vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2015;94:228–237. 246. Nhola LF, Abdelmoneim SS, Villarraga HR, Kohli M, Grothey A, Bordun KA, et al. Echocardiographic assessment for the detection of cardiotoxicity due to vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor therapy in metastatic renal cell and colorectal cancers. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2019;32:267–276. 247. Uraizee I, Cheng S, Moslehi J. Reversible cardiomyopathy associated with sunitinib and sorafenib. N Engl J Med 2011;365:1649–1650. 248. Pandey AK, Singhi EK, Arroyo JP, Ikizler TA, Gould ER, Brown J, et al. Mechanisms of VEGF (vascular endothelial growth factor) inhibitor-associated hypertension and vascular disease. Hypertension 2018;71:E1–E8. 249. Zang J, Wu S, Tang L, Xu X, Bai J, Ding C, et al. Incidence and risk of QTc interval prolongation among cancer patients treated with vandetanib: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2012;7:e30353. 250. Ghatalia P, Je Y, Kaymakcalan MD, Sonpavde G, Choueiri TK. QTc interval prolongation with vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Br J Cancer 2015;112:296–305. 251. Alexandre J, Salem JE, Moslehi J, Sassier M, Ropert C, Cautela J, et al. Identification of anticancer drugs associated with atrial fibrillation: analysis of the WHO pharmacovigilance database. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Pharmacother 2021;7:312–320. 252. EMA. Medicines | European Medicines Agency. Eur Med Agency Sci Med Heal n.d. 253. FDA. Drugs@FDA: FDA-Approved Drugs. FDA US Food Drug Adm n.d. 254. Steingart RM, Bakris GL, Chen HX, Chen MH, Force T, Ivy SP, et al. Management of cardiac toxicity in patients receiving vascular endothelial growth factor signaling pathway inhibitors. Am Heart J 2012;163:156–163. 255. Maitland ML, Bakris GL, Black HR, Chen HX, Durand JB, Elliott WJ, et al. Initial assessment, surveillance, and management of blood pressure in patients receiving vascular endothelial growth factor signaling pathway inhibitors. J Natl Cancer Inst 2010;102:596–604. 256. Barber MC, Mauro MJ, Moslehi J. Cardiovascular care of patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) on tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy. Hematology 2017; 2017:110–114. 257. Moslehi JJ, Deininger M. Tyrosine kinase inhibitor-associated cardiovascular toxicity in chronic myeloid leukemia. J Clin Oncol 2015;33:4210–4218. 258. Li W, Croce K, Steensma DP, McDermott DF, Ben-Yehuda O, Moslehi J. Vascular and metabolic implications of novel targeted cancer therapies: focus on kinase inhibitors. J Am Coll Cardiol 2015;66:1160–1178. 259. Buza V, Rajagopalan B, Curtis AB. Cancer treatment-induced arrhythmias: focus on chemotherapy and targeted therapies. Circ Arrhythmia Electrophysiol 2017;10: e005443. 260. Herrmann J, Yang EH, Iliescu CA, Cilingiroglu M, Charitakis K, Hakeem A, et al. Vascular toxicities of cancer therapies: the old and the new—an evolving avenue. Circulation 2016;133:1272–1289. 261. Cirmi S, El Abd A, Letinier L, Navarra M, Salvo F. Cardiovascular toxicity of tyrosine kinase inhibitors used in chronic myeloid leukemia: an analysis of the FDA adverse event reporting system database (FAERS). Cancers (Basel) 2020;12:826. 262. Gribben JG, Bosch F, Cymbalista F, Geisler CH, Ghia P, Hillmen P, et al. Optimising outcomes for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia on ibrutinib therapy: European recommendations for clinical practice. Br J Haematol 2018;180:666–679. 263. Shanafelt TD, Parikh SA, Noseworthy PA, Goede V, Chaffee KG, Bahlo J, et al. Atrial fibrillation in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Leuk Lymphoma 2017;58:1630–1639. 264. Dickerson T, Wiczer T, Waller A, Philippon J, Porter K, Haddad D, et al. Hypertension and incident cardiovascular events following ibrutinib initiation. Blood 2019;134:1919–1928. 265. Brown JR, Moslehi J, O’Brien S, Ghia P, Hillmen P, Cymbalista F, et al. Characterization of atrial fibrillation adverse events reported in ibrutinib randomized controlled registration trials. Haematologica 2017;102:1796–1805. 266. López-Fernández, T, Canales M, Farmakis D, García-Sanz R, Bosch F, Loscertales J, et al. Ibrutinib-associated atrial fibrillation: a practical approach. Ann Hematol Oncol 2018;5:1203. 267. Salem JE, Manouchehri A, Bretagne M, Lebrun-Vignes B, Groarke JD, Johnson DB, et al. Cardiovascular toxicities associated with ibrutinib. J Am Coll Cardiol 2019;74: 1667–1678. 268. Abdel-Qadir H, Sabrie N, Leong D, Pang A, Austin PC, Prica A, et al. Cardiovascular risk associated with ibrutinib use in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a populationbased cohort study. J Clin Oncol 2021;39:3453–3462. 269. Byrd JC, Hillmen P, Ghia P, Kater AP, Chanan-Khan A, Furman RR, et al. Acalabrutinib versus ibrutinib in previously treated chronic lymphocytic leukemia: results of the first randomized phase III trial. J Clin Oncol 2021;39:3441–3452. 270. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v6.0. National Cancer Institute, 2022. https://ctep.cancer.gov/protocoldevelopment/electronic_applications/ctc.htm. 271. Brown JR, Byrd JC, Ghia P, Sharman JP, Hillmen P, Stephens DM, et al. Cardiovascular adverse events in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia receiving acalabrutinib monotherapy: pooled analysis of 762 patients. Haematologica 2022; 107:1335–1346. 272. Svennberg E, Tjong F, Goette A, Akoum N, Di Biaise L, Bordachar P, et al. How to use digital devices to detect and manage arrhythmias: an EHRA practical guide. Europace. 2022;24:979–1005. 273. Hindricks G, Potpara T, Dagres N, Arbelo E, Bax JJ, Blomström-Lundqvist C, et al. 2020 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Eur Heart J 2021;42:373–498. 274. McMullen JR, Boey EJ, Ooi JYY, Seymour JF, Keating MJ, Tam CS. Ibrutinib increases the risk of atrial fibrillation, potentially through inhibition of cardiac PI3K-Akt signaling. Blood 2014;124:3829–3830. 275. Lee HJ, Chihara D, Wang M, Mouhayar E, Kim P. Ibrutinib-related atrial fibrillation in patients with mantle cell lymphoma. Leuk Lymphoma 2016;57:2914–2916. 276. Rajkumar SV. Multiple myeloma: 2020 update on diagnosis, risk-stratification and management. Am J Hematol 2020;95:548–567. 277. Kumar SK, Dispenzieri A, Lacy MQ, Gertz MA, Buadi FK, Pandey S, et al. Continued improvement in survival in multiple myeloma: changes in early mortality and outcomes in older patients. Leukemia 2014;28:1122–1128. 278. Willis MS, Patterson C. Proteotoxicity and cardiac dysfunction—Alzheimer’s disease of the heart? N Engl J Med 2013;368:455–464. 279. Stewart AK, Rajkumar SV, Dimopoulos MA, Masszi T, Špička I, Oriol A, et al. Carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone for relapsed multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med 2015;372:142–152. 280. Chari A, Keith Stewart A, Russell SD, Moreau P, Herrmann J, Banchs J, et al. Analysis of carfilzomib cardiovascular safety profile across relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma clinical trials. Blood Adv 2018;2:1633–1644. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

281. Waxman AJ, Clasen S, Hwang WT, Garfall A, Vogl DT, Carver J, et al. Carfilzomib-associated cardiovascular adverse events: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Oncol 2018;4:e174519. 282. Mauri L, Elmariah S, Yeh RW, Cutlip DE, Steg PG, Windecker S, et al. Causes of late mortality with dual antiplatelet therapy after coronary stents. Eur Heart J 2016;37: 378–385. 283. Gavazzoni M, Lombardi CM, Vizzardi E, Gorga E, Sciatti E, Rossi L, et al. Irreversible proteasome inhibition with carfilzomib as first line therapy in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: early in vivo cardiovascular effects. Eur J Pharmacol 2018;838:85–90. 284. Siegel D, Martin T, Nooka A, Harvey RD, Vij R, Niesvizky R, et al. Integrated safety profile of single-agent carfilzomib: experience from 526 patients enrolled in 4 phase II clinical studies. Haematologica 2013;98:1753–1761. 285. RidolfiRL, Bulkley BH, Hutchins GM. The conduction system in cardiac amyloidosis. Clinical and pathologic features of 23 patients. Am J Med 1977;62:677–686. 286. Fakhri B, Fiala MA, Shah N, Vij R, Wildes TM. Measuring cardiopulmonary complications of carfilzomib treatment and associated risk factors using the SEER-Medicare database. Cancer 2020;126:808–813. 287. Feng DL, Edwards WD, Oh JK, Chandrasekaran K, Grogan M, Martinez MW, et al. Intracardiac thrombosis and embolism in patients with cardiac amyloidosis. Circulation 2007;116:2420–2426. 288. Mancuso S, Carlisi M, Sarocchi M, Napolitano M, Siragusa S. Cardio-oncology in multiple myeloma: is it time for a specific focus? Leuk Lymphoma 2018;59: 1764–1766. 289. Danhof S, Schreder M, Rasche L, Strifler S, Einsele H, Knop S. ‘Real-life’ experience of preapproval carfilzomib-based therapy in myeloma—analysis of cardiac toxicity and predisposing factors. Eur J Haematol 2016;97:25–32. 290. Garcia-Pavia P, Rapezzi C, Adler Y, Arad M, Basso C, Brucato A, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of cardiac amyloidosis. A position statement of the European Society of Cardiology Working Group on Myocardial and Pericardial Diseases. Eur J Heart Fail 2021;23:512–526. 291. Feng DL, Syed IS, Martinez M, Oh JK, Jaffe AS, Grogan M, et al. Intracardiac thrombosis and anticoagulation therapy in cardiac amyloidosis. Circulation 2009;119: 2490–2497. 292. Sonneveld P, Asselbergs E, Zweegman S, Van Der Holt B, Kersten MJ, Vellenga E, et al. Phase 2 study of carfilzomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone as induction/ consolidation therapy for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Blood 2015;125: 449–456. 293. Wang M, Martin T, Bensinger W, Alsina M, Siegel DS, Kavalerchik E, et al. Phase 2 dose-expansion study (PX-171-006) of carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and low-dose dexamethasone in relapsed or progressive multiple myeloma. Blood 2013;122: 3122–3128. 294. Fradley MG, Groarke JD, Laubach J, Alsina M, Lenihan DJ, Cornell RF, et al. Recurrent cardiotoxicity potentiated by the interaction of proteasome inhibitor and immunomodulatory therapy for the treatment of multiple myeloma. Br J Haematol 2018;180:271–275. 295. Li W, Garcia D, Cornell RF, Gailani D, Laubach J, Maglio ME, et al. Cardiovascular and thrombotic complications of novel multiple myeloma therapies: a review. JAMA Oncol 2017;3:980–988. 296. Palumbo A, Rajkumar SV, Dimopoulos MA, Richardson PG, San Miguel J, Barlogie B, et al. Prevention of thalidomide- and lenalidomide-associated thrombosis in myeloma. Leukemia 2008;22:414–423. 297. Martinez-Naharro A, Gonzalez-Lopez E, Corovic A, Mirelis JG, Baksi AJ, Moon JC, et al. High prevalence of intracardiac thrombi in cardiac amyloidosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2019;73:1733–1734. 298. Lyman GH, Carrier M, Ay C, Di Nisio M, Hicks LK, Khorana AA, et al. American Society of Hematology 2021 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: prevention and treatment in patients with cancer. Blood Adv 2021;5:927–974. 299. Key NS, Khorana AA, Kuderer NM, Bohlke K, Lee AYY, Arcelus JI, et al. Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and treatment in patients with cancer: ASCO clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol 2020;38:496–520. 300. Piedra K, Peterson T, Tan C, Orozco J, Hultcrantz M, Hassoun H, et al. Comparison of venous thromboembolism incidence in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients receiving bortezomib, lenalidomide, dexamethasone (RVD) or carfilzomib, lenalidomide, dexamethasone (KRD) with aspirin or rivaroxaban thromboprophylaxis. Br J Haematol 2022;196:105–109. 301. Cornell RF, Goldhaber SZ, Engelhardt BG, Moslehi J, Jagasia M, Harrell S, et al. Primary prevention of venous thromboembolism with apixaban for multiple myeloma patients receiving immunomodulatory agents. Br J Haematol 2020;190: 555–561. 302. Swan D, Rocci A, Bradbury C, Thachil J. Venous thromboembolism in multiple myeloma—choice of prophylaxis, role of direct oral anticoagulants and special considerations. Br J Haematol 2018;183:538–556. 303. Lendvai N, Tsakos I, Devlin SM, Schaffer WL, Hassoun H, Lesokhin AM, et al. Predictive biomarkers and practical considerations in the management of carfilzomib-associated cardiotoxicity. Leuk Lymphoma 2018;59:1981–1985. 304. Palumbo A, Cavo M, Bringhen S, Zamagni E, Romano A, Patriarca F, et al. Aspirin, warfarin, or enoxaparin thromboprophylaxis in patients with multiple myeloma treated with thalidomide: a phase III, open-label, randomized trial. J Clin Oncol 2011;29:986–993. 305. Larocca A, Cavallo F, Bringhen S, Di Raimondo F, Falanga A, Evangelista A, et al. Aspirin or enoxaparin thromboprophylaxis for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma treated with lenalidomide. Blood 2012;119:933–939. 306. Chalayer E, Bourmaud A, Tinquaut F, Chauvin F, Tardy B. Cost-effectiveness analysis of low-molecular-weight heparin versus aspirin thromboprophylaxis in patients newly diagnosed with multiple myeloma. Thromb Res 2016;145:119–125. 307. Zoppellaro G, Veronese N, Granziera S, Gobbi L, Stubbs B, Cohen AT. Primary thromboembolic prevention in multiple myeloma patients: an exploratory meta-analysis on aspirin use. Semin Hematol 2018;55:182–184. 308. Mincu RI, Mahabadi AA, Michel L, Mrotzek SM, Schadendorf D, Rassaf T, et al. Cardiovascular adverse events associated with BRAF and MEK inhibitors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Netw Open 2019;2:e198890. 309. Glen C, Tan YY, Waterston A, Evans TRJ, Jones RJ, Petrie MC, et al. Mechanistic and clinical overview cardiovascular toxicity of BRAF and MEK inhibitors: JACC: CardioOncology state-of-the-art review. Cardio Oncol 2022;4:1–18. 310. Flaherty KT, Robert C, Hersey P, Nathan P, Garbe C, Milhem M, et al. Improved survival with MEK inhibition in BRAF-mutated melanoma. N Engl J Med 2012; 367:107–114. 311. Robert C, Karaszewska B, Schachter J, Rutkowski P, Mackiewicz A, Stroiakovski D, et al. Improved overall survival in melanoma with combined dabrafenib and trametinib. N Engl J Med 2015;372:30–39. 312. Long GV, Stroyakovskiy D, Gogas H, Levchenko E, De Braud F, Larkin J, et al. Dabrafenib and trametinib versus dabrafenib and placebo for Val600 BRAF-mutant melanoma: a multicentre, double-blind, phase 3 randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2015;386:444–451. 313. Bronte E, Bronte G, Novo G, Rinaldi G, Bronte F, Passiglia F, et al. Cardiotoxicity mechanisms of the combination of BRAF-inhibitors and MEK-inhibitors. Pharmacol Ther 2018;192:65–73. 314. Gogas HJ, Flaherty KT, Dummer R, Ascierto PA, Arance A, Mandala M, et al. Adverse events associated with encorafenib plus binimetinib in the COLUMBUS study: incidence, course and management. Eur J Cancer 2019;119:97–106. 315. Banks M, Crowell K, Proctor A, Jensen BC. Cardiovascular effects of the MEK inhibitor, trametinib: a case report, literature review, and consideration of mechanism. Cardiovasc Toxicol 2017;17:487–493. 316. Hu JR, Florido R, Lipson EJ, Naidoo J, Ardehali R, Tocchetti CG, et al. Cardiovascular toxicities associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. Cardiovasc Res 2019;115: 854–868. 317. Postow MA, Sidlow R, Hellmann MD. Immune-related adverse events associated with immune checkpoint blockade. N Engl J Med 2018;378:158–168. 318. Drobni ZD, Alvi RM, Taron J, Zafar A, Murphy SP, Rambarat PK, et al. Association between immune checkpoint inhibitors with cardiovascular events and atherosclerotic plaque. Circulation 2020;142:2299–2311. 319. Rubio-Infante N, Ramírez-Flores YA, Castillo EC, Lozano O, García-Rivas G, Torre-Amione G. Cardiotoxicity associated with immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy: a meta-analysis. Eur J Heart Fail 2021;23:1739–1747. 320. Salem JE, Manouchehri A, Moey M, Lebrun-Vignes B, Bastarache L, Pariente A, et al. Cardiovascular toxicities associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: an observational, retrospective, pharmacovigilance study. Lancet Oncol 2018;19:1579–1589. 321. Dolladille C, Ederhy S, Allouche S, Dupas Q, Gervais R, Madelaine J, et al. Late cardiac adverse events in patients with cancer treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. J Immunother Cancer 2020;8:e000261. 322. D’Souza M, Nielsen D, Svane IM, Iversen K, Rasmussen PV, Madelaire C, et al. The risk of cardiac events in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors: a nationwide Danish study. Eur Heart J 2021;42:1621–1631. 323. Dolladille C, Akroun J, Morice P-M, Dompmartin A, Ezine E, Sassier M, et al. Cardiovascular immunotoxicities associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: a safety meta-analysis. Eur Heart J 2021;42:4964–4977. 324. Zamami Y, Niimura T, Okada N, Koyama T, Fukushima K, Izawa-Ishizawa Y, et al. Factors associated with immune checkpoint inhibitor–related myocarditis. JAMA Oncol 2019;5:1635–1637. 325. Zhang L, Reynolds KL, Lyon AR, Palaskas N, Neilan TG. The evolving immunotherapy landscape and the epidemiology, diagnosis, and management of cardiotoxicity: JACC: CardioOncology primer. JACC CardioOncology 2021;3:35–47. 326. Lyon AR, Yousaf N, Battisti NML, Moslehi J, Larkin J. Immune checkpoint inhibitors and cardiovascular toxicity. Lancet Oncol 2018;19:e447–e458. 327. Schiffer WB, Deych E, Lenihan DJ, Zhang KW. Coronary and aortic calcification are associated with cardiovascular events on immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. Int J Cardiol 2021;322:177–182. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

328. Naing A, Infante J, Goel S, Burris H, Black C, Marshall S, et al. Anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody MEDI0680 in a phase I study of patients with advanced solid malignancies. J Immunother Cancer 2019;7:225. 329. Allenbach Y, Anquetil C, Manouchehri A, Benveniste O, Lambotte O, Lebrun-Vignes B, et al. Immune checkpoint inhibitor-induced myositis, the earliest and most lethal complication among rheumatic and musculoskeletal toxicities. Autoimmun Rev 2020;19:102586. 330. Anquetil C, Salem JE, Lebrun-Vignes B, Johnson DB, Mammen AL, Stenzel W, et al. Immune checkpoint inhibitor–associated myositis: expanding the spectrum of cardiac complications of the immunotherapy revolution. Circulation 2018;138: 743–745. 331. Bonaca MP, Olenchock BA, Salem JE, Wiviott SD, Ederhy S, Cohen A, et al. Myocarditis in the setting of cancer therapeutics: proposed case definitions for emerging clinical syndromes in cardio-oncology. Circulation 2019;140:80–91. 332. Lehmann LH, Cautela J, Palaskas N, Baik AH, Meijers WC, Allenbach Y, et al. Clinical strategy for the diagnosis and treatment of immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated myocarditis: a narrative review. JAMA Cardiol 2021;6:1329–1337. 333. Rini B, Moslehi JJ, Bonaca M, Schmidinger M, Albiges L, Choueiri TK, et al. Prospective cardiovascular surveillance of immune checkpoint inhibitor-based combination therapy in patients with advanced renal cell cancer: data from the phase 3 JAVELIN Renal 101 trial. J Clin Oncol 2022;40:1929–1938. 334. Awadalla M, Mahmood SS, Groarke JD, Hassan MZO, Nohria A, Rokicki A, et al. Global longitudinal strain and cardiac events in patients with immune checkpoint inhibitor-related myocarditis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2020;75:467–478. 335. Kondapalli L, Bottinor W, Lenneman C. By releasing the brakes with immunotherapy, are we accelerating atherosclerosis? Circulation 2020;142:2312–2315. 336. Johnson DB, Nebhan CA, Moslehi JJ, Balko JM. Immune-checkpoint inhibitors: longterm implications of toxicity. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2022;19:254–267. 337. Zhao J, Zhu S, Sun L, Meng F, Zhao L, Zhao Y, et al. Androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer is associated with cardiovascular morbidity and mortality: a meta-analysis of population-based observational studies. PLoS One 2014;9: e107516. 338. Bhatia N, Santos M, Jones LW, Beckman JA, Penson DF, Morgans AK, et al. Cardiovascular effects of androgen deprivation therapy for the treatment of prostate cancer: ABCDE Steps to reduce cardiovascular disease in patients with prostate cancer. Circulation 2016;133:537–541. 339. Okwuosa TM, Morgans A, Rhee J-W, Reding KW, Maliski S, Plana J-C, et al. Impact of hormonal therapies for treatment of hormone-dependent cancers (breast and prostate) on the cardiovascular system: effects and modifications: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circ Genomic Precis Med 2021;14: e000082. 340. Barber M, Nguyen L, Wassermann J, Spano J, Funck-Brentano C, Salem J. Cardiac arrhythmia considerations of hormone cancer therapies. Cardiovasc Res 2019;115: 878–894. 341. Shore ND, Saad F, Cookson MS, George DJ, Saltzstein DR, Tutrone R, et al. Oral relugolix for androgen-deprivation therapy in advanced prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2020;382:2187–2196. 342. Abufaraj M, Iwata T, Kimura S, Haddad A, Al-Ani H, Abusubaih L, et al. Differential impact of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist versus agonist on clinical safety and oncologic outcomes on patients with metastatic prostate cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Eur Urol 2021;79:44–53. 343. Lopes RD, Higano CS, Slovin SF, Nelson AJ, Bigelow R, Sørensen PS, et al. Cardiovascular safety of degarelix versus leuprolide in patients with prostate cancer: the primary results of the PRONOUNCE randomized trial. Circulation 2021; 144:1295–1307. 344. Wilk M, Waśko-Grabowska A, Skoneczna I, Szmit S. Angiotensin system inhibitors may improve outcomes of patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer during abiraterone acetate treatment—a cardio-oncology study. Front Oncol 2021;11: 664741. 345. Salem JE, Waintraub X, Courtillot C, Shaffer CM, Gandjbakhch E, Maupain C, et al. Hypogonadism as a reversible cause of Torsades de Pointes in men. Circulation 2018;138:110–113. 346. Salem JE, Alexandre J, Bachelot A, Funck-Brentano C. Influence of steroid hormones on ventricular repolarization. Pharmacol Ther 2016;167:38–47. 347. Salem JE, Yang T, Moslehi JJ, Waintraub X, Gandjbakhch E, Bachelot A, et al. Androgenic effects on ventricular repolarization a translational study from the international pharmacovigilance database to iPSC-cardiomyocytes. Circulation 2019;140:1070–1080. 348. Hasegawa K, Ito H, Kaseno K, Miyazaki S, Shiomi Y, Tama N, et al. Impact of medical castration on malignant arrhythmias in patients with prostate cancer. J Am Heart Assoc 2021;10:e017267. 349. Fradley MG, Beckie TM, Brown SA, Cheng RK, Dent SF, Nohria A, et al. Recognition, prevention, and management of arrhythmias and autonomic disorders in cardio-oncology: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2021;144:E41–E55. 350. Olsson H, Petri N, Erichsen L, Malmberg A, Grundemar L. Effect of degarelix, a gonadotropin-releasing hormone receptor antagonist for the treatment of prostate cancer, on cardiac repolarisation in a randomised, placebo and active comparator controlled thorough QT/QTc trial in healthy men. Clin Drug Investig 2017;37: 873–879. 351. Baum M, Buzdar AU, Cuzick J, Forbes J, Houghton J, Klijn JGM, et al. Anastrozole alone or in combination with tamoxifen versus tamoxifen alone for adjuvant treatment of postmenopausal women with early breast cancer: first results of the ATAC randomised trial. Lancet 2002;359:2131–2139. 352. ARIMIDEX® (anastrozole). Highlights of Prescribing Information. Wilmington, DE: AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP, 2014. 353. Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98 Collaborative Group, Thürlimann B, Keshaviah A, Coates AS, Mouridsen H, Mauriac L, et al. A comparison of letrozole and tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2005;353:2747–2757. 354. Amir E, Seruga B, Niraula S, Carlsson L, Ocaña A. Toxicity of adjuvant endocrine therapy in postmenopausal breast cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst 2011;103:1299–1309. 355. Goldvaser H, Barnes TA, Seruga B, Cescon DW, Ocaña A, Ribnikar D, et al. Toxicity of extended adjuvant therapy with aromatase inhibitors in early breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst 2018;110:31–39. 356. Curigliano G, Azambuja E, Lenihan D, Calabrò MG, Cardinale D, Cipolla CM. Prevention, monitoring, and management of cardiac dysfunction in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Oncologist 2019;24:e1034–e1043. 357. KISQALI (ribociclib). Highlights of Prescribing Information. East Hanover, NJ: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, 2018. 358. IBRANCE (palbociclib). Highlights of Prescribing Information. New York, NY: Pfizer, 2018. 359. VERZENIO (abemaciclib). Highlights of Prescribing Information. Indianapolis, IN: Eli Lilly and Company, 2018. 360. Santoni M, Occhipinti G, Romagnoli E, Miccini F, Scoccia L, Giulietti M, et al. Different cardiotoxicity of palbociclib and ribociclib in breast cancer: gene expression and pharmacological data analyses, biological basis, and therapeutic implications. BioDrugs 2019;33:613–620. 361. Hortobagyi GN, Stemmer SM, Burris HA, Yap Y-S, Sonke GS, Paluch-Shimon S, et al. Ribociclib as first-line therapy for HR-positive, advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2016;375:1738–1748. 362. Tripathy D, Im SA, Colleoni M, Franke F, Bardia A, Harbeck N, et al. Ribociclib plus endocrine therapy for premenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive, advanced breast cancer (MONALEESA-7): a randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2018;19:904–915. 363. Finn RS, Martin M, Rugo HS, Jones S, Im S-A, Gelmon K, et al. Palbociclib and letrozole in advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2016;375:1925–1936. 364. Cristofanilli M, Turner NC, Bondarenko I, Ro J, Im SA, Masuda N, et al. Fulvestrant plus palbociclib versus fulvestrant plus placebo for treatment of hormone-receptor-positive, HER2–negative metastatic breast cancer that progressed on previous endocrine therapy (PALOMA-3): final analysis of the multicentre, double-blind, phas. Lancet Oncol 2016;17:425–439. 365. Slamon DJ, Neven P, Chia S, Fasching PA, De Laurentiis M, Im SA, et al. Phase III randomized study of ribociclib and fulvestrant in hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer: MONALEESA-3. J Clin Oncol 2018;36:2465–2472. 366. Durairaj C, Ruiz-Garcia A, Gauthier ER, Huang X, Lu DR, Hoffman JT, et al. Palbociclib has no clinically relevant effect on the QTc interval in patients with advanced breast cancer. Anticancer Drugs 2018;29:271–280. 367. Im S-A, Lu Y-S, Bardia A, Harbeck N, Colleoni M, Franke F, et al. Overall survival with ribociclib plus endocrine therapy in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2019;381: 307–316. 368. Slamon DJ, Neven P, Chia S, Fasching PA, De Laurentiis M, Im S-A, et al. Overall survival with ribociclib plus fulvestrant in advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2020;382:514–524. 369. Tamargo J, Caballero R, Delpón E. Cancer chemotherapy and cardiac arrhythmias: a review. Drug Saf 2015;38:129–152. 370. Wang L, Wang W. Safety and efficacy of anaplastic lymphoma kinase tyrosine kinase inhibitors in non-small cell lung cancer (Review). Oncol Rep 2021;45:13–28. 371. Rao VU, Reeves DJ, Chugh AR, O’Quinn R, Fradley MG, Raghavendra M, et al. Clinical approach to cardiovascular toxicity of oral antineoplastic agents: JACC state-of-the-art review. J Am Coll Cardiol 2021;77:2693–2716. 372. Shaw AT, Bauer TM, de Marinis F, Felip E, Goto Y, Liu G, et al. First-line lorlatinib or crizotinib in advanced ALK-positive lung cancer. N Engl J Med 2020;383: 2018–2029. 373. Thein KZ, Swarup S, Ball S, Quirch M, Vorakunthada Y, Htwe KK, et al. Incidence of cardiac toxicities in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with osimertinib: a combined analysis of two phase III randomized controlled trials. Ann Oncol 2018;29:viii500. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

374. Anand K, Ensor J, Trachtenberg B, Bernicker EH. Osimertinib-induced cardiotoxicity: a retrospective review of the FDA Adverse Events Reporting System (FAERS). JACC CardioOncology 2019;1:172–178. 375. Kunimasa K, Kamada R, Oka T, Oboshi M, Kimura M, Inoue T, et al. Cardiac adverse events in EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer treated with osimertinib. JACC CardioOncology 2020;2:1–10. 376. Ewer MS, Tekumalla SH, Walding A, Atuah KN. Cardiac safety of osimertinib: a review of data. J Clin Oncol 2021;39:328–337. 377. Frey N, Porter D. Cytokine release syndrome with chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2019;25:e123–e127. 378. Alvi RM, Frigault MJ, Fradley MG, Jain MD, Mahmood SS, Awadalla M, et al. Cardiovascular events among adults treated with chimeric antigen receptor T-cells (CAR-T). J Am Coll Cardiol 2019;74:3099–3108. 379. Goldman A, Maor E, Bomze D, Liu JE, Herrmann J, Fein J, et al. Adverse cardiovascular and pulmonary events associated with chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2021;78:1800–1813. 380. Fradley MG, Damrongwatanasuk R, Chandrasekhar S, Alomar M, Kip KE, Sarnaik AA. Cardiovascular toxicity and mortality associated with adoptive cell therapy and tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes for advanced stage melanoma. J Immunother 2021;44:86–89. 381. Ghosh AK, Chen DH, Guha A, Mackenzie S, Walker JM, Roddie C. CAR T cell therapy-related cardiovascular outcomes and management: systemic disease or direct cardiotoxicity? JACC CardioOncology 2020;2:97–109. 382. Lefebvre B, Kang Y, Smith AM, Frey NV, Carver JR, Scherrer-Crosbie M. Cardiovascular effects of CAR T cell therapy: a restrospective study. JACC CardioOncology 2020;2:193–203. 383. Salem JE, Ederhy S, Lebrun-Vignes B, Moslehi JJ. Cardiac events associated with chimeric antigen receptor T-cells (CAR-T): a VigiBase perspective. J Am Coll Cardiol 2020;75:2521–2523. 384. Ganatra S, Redd R, Hayek SS, Parikh R, Azam T, Yanik GA, et al. Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy-associated cardiomyopathy in patients with refractory or relapsed non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Circulation 2020;142:1687–1690. 385. Lee JB, Vasic D, Kang H, Fang KKL, Zhang L. State-of-art of cellular therapy for acute leukemia. Int J Mol Sci 2021;22:4590. 386. Brahmer JR, Abu-Sbeih H, Ascierto PA, Brufsky J, Cappelli LC, Cortazar FB, et al. Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) clinical practice guideline on immune checkpoint inhibitor-related adverse events. J Immunother Cancer 2021;9:e002435. 387. Ragoonanan D, Khazal SJ, Abdel-Azim H, McCall D, Cuglievan B, Tambaro FP, et al. Diagnosis, grading and management of toxicities from immunotherapies in children, adolescents and young adults with cancer. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2021;18:435–453. 388. Maus M V, Alexander S, Bishop MR, Brudno JN, Callahan C, Davila ML, et al. Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) clinical practice guideline on immune effector cell-related adverse events. J Immunother Cancer 2020;8:e001511. 389. Darby SC, Ewertz M, McGale P, Bennet AM, Blom-Goldman U, Brønnum D, et al. Risk of ischemic heart disease in women after radiotherapy for breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2013;368:987–998. 390. Van Nimwegen FA, Schaapveld M, Cutter DJ, Janus CPM, Krol ADG, Hauptmann M, et al. Radiation dose-response relationship for risk of coronary heart disease in survivors of Hodgkin lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 2016;34:235–243. 391. Cutter DJ, Schaapveld M, Darby SC, Hauptmann M, Van Nimwegen FA, Krol ADG, et al. Risk for valvular heart disease after treatment for Hodgkin lymphoma. J Natl Cancer Inst 2015;107:djv008. 392. Bergom C, Bradley JA, Ng AK, Samson P, Robinson C, Lopez-Mattei J, et al. Past, present, and future of radiation-induced cardiotoxicity: refinements in targeting, surveillance, and risk stratification. JACC CardioOncology 2021;3:343–359. 393. Belzile-Dugas E, Eisenberg MJ. Radiation-induced cardiovascular disease: review of an underrecognized pathology. J Am Heart Assoc 2021;10:e021686. 394. Carlson LE, Watt GP, Tonorezos ES, Chow EJ, Yu AF, Woods M, et al. Coronary artery disease in young women after radiation therapy for breast cancer. JACC CardioOncology 2021;3:381–392. 395. Jacob S, Camilleri J, Derreumaux S, Walker V, Lairez O, Lapeyre M, et al. Is mean heart dose a relevant surrogate parameter of left ventricle and coronary arteries exposure during breast cancer radiotherapy: a dosimetric evaluation based on individually-determined radiation dose (BACCARAT study). Radiat Oncol 2019; 14:29. 396. Hoppe BS, Bates JE, Mendenhall NP, Morris CG, Louis D, Ho MW, et al. The meaningless meaning of mean heart dose in mediastinal lymphoma in the modern radiation therapy era. Pract Radiat Oncol 2020;10:e147–e154. 397. Maraldo M V, Giusti F, Vogelius IR, Lundemann M, Van der Kaaij MAE, Ramadan S, et al. Cardiovascular disease after treatment for Hodgkin’s lymphoma: an analysis of nine collaborative EORTC-LYSA trials. Lancet Haematol 2015;2:e492–e502. 398. Atkins KM, Bitterman DS, Chaunzwa TL, Kozono DE, Baldini EH, Aerts HJWL, et al. Mean heart dose is an inadequate surrogate for left anterior descending coronary artery dose and the risk of major adverse cardiac events in lung cancer radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol 2021;110:1473–1479. 399. Mulrooney DA, Yeazel MW, Kawashima T, Mertens AC, Mitby P, Stovall M, et al. Cardiac outcomes in a cohort of adult survivors of childhood and adolescent cancer: retrospective analysis of the childhood cancer survivor study cohort. BMJ 2009; 339:b4606. 400. Van Nimwegen FA, Schaapveld M, Janus CPM, Krol ADG, Petersen EJ, Raemaekers JMM, et al. Cardiovascular disease after Hodgkin lymphoma treatment 40-year disease risk. JAMA Intern Med 2015;175:1007–1017. 401. Jacobse JN, Duane FK, Boekel NB, Schaapveld M, Hauptmann M, Hooning MJ, et al. Radiation dose-response for risk of myocardial infarction in breast cancer survivors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2019;103:595–604. 402. Fuchs M, Goergen H, Kobe C, Kuhnert G, Lohri A, Greil R, et al. Positron emission tomography-guided treatment in early-stage favorable Hodgkin lymphoma: final results of the international, randomized phase III HD16 trial by the German Hodgkin Study Group. J Clin Oncol 2019;37:2835–2845. 403. Radford J, Illidge T, Counsell N, Hancock B, Pettengell R, Johnson P, et al. Results of a trial of PET-directed therapy for early-stage Hodgkin’s lymphoma. N Engl J Med 2015;372:1598–1607. 404. Kunkler IH, Williams LJ, Jack WJL, Cameron DA, Dixon JM. Breast-conserving surgery with or without irradiation in women aged 65 years or older with early breast cancer (PRIME II): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 2015;16:266–273. 405. Song AJ, Manukian G, Taylor AK, Anne PR, Simone NL. Concerns for active breathing control (ABC) with breast cancer in the era of COVID-19: maximizing infection control while minimizing heart dose. Adv Radiat Oncol 2020;5:573–574. 406. Petersen PM, Aznar MC, Berthelsen AK, Loft A, Schut DA, Maraldo M, et al. Prospective phase II trial of image-guided radiotherapy in Hodgkin lymphoma: benefit of deep inspiration breath-hold. Acta Oncol (Madr) 2015;54:60–66. 407. Persson GF, Scherman Rydhög J, Josipovic M, Maraldo M V, Nygård L, Costa J, et al. Deep inspiration breath-hold volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy decreases dose to mediastinal structures in locally advanced lung cancer. Acta Oncol (Madr) 2016;55:1053–1056. 408. Dabaja BS, Hoppe BS, Plastaras JP, Newhauser W, Rosolova K, Flampouri S, et al. Proton therapy for adults with mediastinal lymphomas: the International Lymphoma Radiation Oncology Group guidelines. Blood 2018;132:1635–1646. Erratum in: Blood 2019;133:1384–1385. 409. Rotz SJ, Ryan TD, Hayek SS. Cardiovascular disease and its management in children and adults undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. J Thromb Thrombolysis 2021;51:854–869. 410. Oliveira GH, Al-Kindi SG, Guha A, Dey AK, Rhea IB, DeLima MJ. Cardiovascular risk assessment and management of patients undergoing hematopoietic cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 2021;56:544–551. 411. Sorror ML, Maris MB, Storb R, Baron F, Sandmaier BM, Maloney DG, et al. Hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT)-specific comorbidity index: a new tool for risk assessment before allogeneic HCT. Blood 2005;106:2912–2919. 412. Tichelli A, Bucher C, Rovó A, Stussi G, Stern M, Paulussen M, et al. Premature cardiovascular disease after allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation. Blood 2007;110:3463–3471. 413. Alblooshi R, Kanfar S, Lord B, Atenafu EG, Michelis FV, Pasic I, et al. Clinical prevalence and outcome of cardiovascular events in the first 100 days postallogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant. Eur J Haematol 2021;106:32–39. 414. Duléry R, Mohty R, Labopin M, Sestili S, Malard F, Brissot E, et al. Early cardiac toxicity associated with post-transplant cyclophosphamide in allogeneic stem cell transplantation. JACC CardioOncology 2021;3:250–259. 415. López-Fernández T, Vadillo IS, de la Guía AL, Barbier KH. Cardiovascular issues in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Curr Treat Options Oncol 2021;22: 51. 416. Ohmoto A, Fuji S. Cardiac complications associated with hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 2021;56:2637–2643. 417. Takatsuka H, Nakajima T, Nomura K, Okikawa Y, Wakae T, Toda A, et al. Prognosis value of atrial natriuretic peptide and brain natriuretic peptide for heart failure in patients undergoing allogeneic bone marrow transplantation. Hematology 2006; 11:351–354. 418. Snowden JA, Hill GR, Hunt P, Carnoutsos S, Spearing RL, Espiner E, et al. Assessment of cardiotoxicity during haemopoietic stem cell transplantation with plasma brain natriuretic peptide. Bone Marrow Transplant 2000;26:309–313. 419. Alvarez-Cardona JA, Zhang KW, Mitchell JD, Zaha VG, Fisch MJ, Lenihan DJ. Cardiac biomarkers during cancer therapy: practical applications for cardio-oncology. JACC CardioOncology 2020;2:791–794. 420. Mohammed J, Smith SR, Burns L, Basak G, Aljurf M, Savani BN, et al. Role of physical therapy before and after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: white paper report. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2019;25:e191–e198. 421. Haugnes HS, Wethal T, Aass N, Dahl O, Klepp O, Langberg CW, et al. Cardiovascular risk factors and morbidity in long-term survivors of testicular cancer: a 20-year follow-up study. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:4649–4657. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

422. Herrmann J. Cardiovascular toxicity with cisplatin in patients with testicular cancer: looking for something heavier than heavy metal. JACC CardioOncology 2020;2: 456–459. 423. Cerchione C, Peleteiro Raíndo A, Mosquera Orgueira A, Mosquera Torre A, Bao Pérez L, Marconi G, et al. Safety of FLT3 inhibitors in patients with acute myeloid leukemia. Expert Rev Hematol 2021;14:851–865. 424. Dong H, Yao L, Wang M, Wang M, Li X, Sun X, et al. Can ACEI/ARB prevent the cardiotoxicity caused by chemotherapy in early-stage breast cancer?—A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Transl Cancer Res 2020;11: 7034–7043. 425. Cardinale D, Colombo A, Lamantia G, Colombo N, Civelli M, De Giacomi G, et al. Anthracycline-induced cardiomyopathy: clinical relevance and response to pharmacologic therapy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;55:213–220. 426. Modi S, Saura C, Yamashita T, Park YH, Kim S-B, Tamura K, et al. Trastuzumab deruxtecan in previously treated HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2020;382: 610–621. 427. Hussain Y, Drill E, Dang CT, Liu JE, Steingart RM, Yu AF. Cardiac outcomes of trastuzumab therapy in patients with HER2-positive breast cancer and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2019;175:239–246. 428. Leong DP, Cosman T, Alhussein MM, Kumar Tyagi N, Karampatos S, Barron CC, et al. Safety of continuing trastuzumab despite mild cardiotoxicity: a phase I trial. JACC CardioOncology 2019;1:1–10. 429. Omland T, Heck SL, Gulati G. The role of cardioprotection in cancer therapy cardiotoxicity: JACC: CardioOncology state-of-the-art review. Cardio Oncol 2022;4: 19–37. 430. Russell SD, Blackwell KL, Lawrence J, Pippen JE, Roe MT, Wood F, et al. Independent adjudication of symptomatic heart failure with the use of doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by trastuzumab adjuvant therapy: A combined review of cardiac data from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-31 and the North Central Cancer Treatment Group N9831 clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:3416–3421. 431. Ewer MS, Vooletich MT, Durand JB, Woods ML, Davis JR, Valero V, et al. Reversibility of trastuzumab-related cardiotoxicity: new insights based on clinical course and response to medical treatment. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:7820–7826. 432. Guarneri V, Lenihan DJ, Valero V, Durand JB, Broglio K, Hess KR, et al. Long-term cardiac tolerability of trastuzumab in metastatic breast cancer: the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center experience. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:4107–4115. 433. Khoury K, Lynce F, Barac A, Geng X, Dang C, Yu AF, et al. Long-term follow-up assessment of cardiac safety in SAFE-HEaRt, a clinical trial evaluating the use of HER2-targeted therapies in patients with breast cancer and compromised heart function. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2021;185:863–868. 434. Mahmood SS, Fradley MG, Cohen J V, Nohria A, Reynolds KL, Heinzerling LM, et al. Myocarditis in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. J Am Coll Cardiol 2018;71:1755–1764. 435. Power JR, Alexandre J, Choudhary A, Ozbay B, Hayek S, Asnani A, et al. Electrocardiographic manifestations of immune checkpoint inhibitor myocarditis. Circulation 2021;144:1521–1523. Erratum in: Circulation 2021;144:e490. 436. Zhang L, Zlotoff DA, Awadalla M, Mahmood SS, Nohria A, Hassan MZO, et al. Major adverse cardiovascular events and the timing and dose of corticosteroids in immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated myocarditis. Circulation 2020;141: 2031–2034. 437. Boughdad S, Latifyan S, Fenwick C, Bouchaab H, Suffiotti M, Moslehi JJ, et al. 68Ga-DOTATOC PET/CT to detect immune checkpoint inhibitor-related myocarditis. J Immunother Cancer 2021;9:e003594. 438. Finke D, Heckmann MB, Herpel E, Katus HA, Haberkorn U, Leuschner F, et al. Early detection of checkpoint inhibitor-associated myocarditis using 68Ga-FAPI PET/CT. Front Cardiovasc Med 2021;8:614997. 439. Chen Y, Jia Y, Liu Q, Shen Y, Zhu H, Dong X, et al. Myocarditis related to immune checkpoint inhibitors treatment: two case reports and literature review. Ann Palliat Med 2021;10:8512–8517. 440. Palaskas NL, Segura A, Lelenwa L, Siddiqui BA, Subudhi SK, Lopez-Mattei J, et al. Immune checkpoint inhibitor myocarditis: elucidating the spectrum of disease through endomyocardial biopsy. Eur J Heart Fail 2021;23:1725–1735. 441. Brugada J, Katritsis DG, Arbelo E, Arribas F, Bax JJ, Blomstrom-Lundqvist C, et al. 2019 ESC Guidelines for the management of patients with supraventricular tachycardia. Eur Heart J 2020;41:655–720. 442. Zeppenfeld K, Tfelt-Hansen J, de Riva M, Winkel BG, Behr ER, Blom NA, et al. 2022 ESC Guidelines for the management of patients with ventricular arrhythmias and the prevention of sudden cardiac death. Eur Heart J 2022;43:3997–4126. 443. Glikson M, Nielsen JC, Kronborg MB, Michowitz Y, Auricchio A, Barbash IM, et al. 2021 ESC Guidelines on cardiac pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy. Eur Heart J 2021;42:3427–3520. 444. Adler Y, Charron P, Imazio M, Badano L, Barón-Esquivias G, Bogaert J, et al. 2015 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of pericardial diseases: the Task Force for the Diagnosis and Management of Pericardial Diseases of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Endorsed by: The European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Eur Heart J 2015;36:2921–2964. 445. Ammirati E, Frigerio M, Adler ED, Basso C, Birnie DH, Brambatti M, et al. Management of acute myocarditis and chronic inflammatory cardiomyopathy: an expert consensus document. Circ Heart Fail 2020;13:e007405. 446. Thuny F, Alexandre J, Salem JE, Mirabel M, Dolladille C, Cohen-Solal A, et al. Management of immune checkpoint inhibitor–induced myocarditis: the French Working Group’s Plea for a pragmatic approach. JACC CardioOncology 2021;3: 157–161. 447. Chung ES, Packer M, Lo KH, Fasanmade AA, Willerson JT. Randomized, doubleblind, placebo-controlled, pilot trial of infliximab, a chimeric monoclonal antibody to tumor necrosis factor-α, in patients with moderate-to-severe heart failure: Results of the Anti-TNF Therapy Against Congestive Heart Failure (ATTACH) trial. Circulation 2003;107:3133–3140. 448. Cautela J, Zeriouh S, Gaubert M, Bonello L, Laine M, Peyrol M, et al. Intensified immunosuppressive therapy in patients with immune checkpoint inhibitor-induced myocarditis. J Immunother Cancer 2020;8:e001887. 449. Dolladille C, Ederhy S, Sassier M, Cautela J, Thuny F, Cohen AA, et al. Immune checkpoint inhibitor rechallenge after immune-related adverse events in patients with cancer. JAMA Oncol 2020;6:865–871. 450. Roth ME, Muluneh B, Jensen BC, Madamanchi C, Lee CB. Left ventricular dysfunction after treatment with ipilimumab for metastatic melanoma. Am J Ther 2016;23: e1925–e1928. 451. Weinstock C, Khozin S, Suzman D, Zhang L, Tang S, Wahby S, et al. U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval summary: atezolizumab for metastatic non–small cell lung cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2017;23:4534–4539. 452. Ball S, Ghosh RK, Wongsaengsak S, Bandyopadhyay D, Ghosh GC, Aronow WS, et al. Cardiovascular toxicities of immune checkpoint inhibitors: JACC review topic of the week. J Am Coll Cardiol 2019;74:1714–1727. 453. Thavendiranathan P, Zhang L, Zafar A, Drobni ZD, Mahmood SS, Cabral M, et al. Myocardial T1 and T2 mapping by magnetic resonance in patients with immune checkpoint inhibitor–associated myocarditis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2021;77:1503–1516. 454. Brahmer JR, Lacchetti C, Schneider BJ, Atkins MB, Brassil KJ, Caterino JM, et al. Management of immune-related adverse events in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline. J Clin Oncol 2018;36:1714–1768. 455. Guha A, Addison D, Jain P, Gutierrez JM, Ghosh A, Roddie C, et al. Cardiovascular events associated with chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy: cross-sectional FDA adverse events reporting system analysis: cardiovascular events with CAR-T therapy. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2020;26:2211–2216. 456. Kupari M, Volin L, Suokas A, Hekali P, Ruutu T. Cardiac involvement in bone marrow transplantation: serial changes in left ventricular size, mass and performance. J Intern Med 1990;227:259–266. 457. Tonorezos ES, Stillwell EE, Calloway JJ, Glew T, Wessler JD, Rebolledo BJ, et al. Arrhythmias in the setting of hematopoietic cell transplants. Bone Marrow Transplant 2015;50:1212–1216. 458. Collet J-P, Thiele H, Barbato E, Barthélémy O, Bauersachs J, Bhatt DL, et al. 2020 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation. Eur Heart J 2021;42:1289–1367. 459. Abo S, Ritchie D, Denehy L, Panek-Hudson Y, Irving L, Granger CL. A hospital and home-based exercise program to address functional decline in people following allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Support Care Cancer 2018;26:1727–1736. 460. Squires RW, Shultz AM, Herrmann J. Exercise training and cardiovascular health in cancer patients. Curr Oncol Rep 2018;20:27. 461. Keen C, Skilbeck J, Ross H, Smith L, Collins K, Dixey J, et al. Is it feasible to conduct a randomised controlled trial of pretransplant exercise (prehabilitation) for patients with multiple myeloma awaiting autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation? Protocol for the PREeMPT study. BMJ Open 2018;8:e021333. 462. Desai R, Desai A, Abbas SA, Patel U, Bansod S, Damarlapally N, et al. National prevalence, trends and outcomes of takotsubo syndrome in hospitalizations with prior history of mediastinal/intrathoracic cancer and radiation therapy. Int J Cardiol 2020;309:14–18. 463. Sattler K, El-Battrawy I, Lang S, Zhou X, Schramm K, Tülümen E, et al. Prevalence of cancer in Takotsubo cardiomyopathy: short and long-term outcome. Int J Cardiol 2017;238:159–165. 464. Omerovic E, Citro R, Bossone E, Redfors B, Backs J, Bruns B, et al. Pathophysiology of Takotsubo syndrome—a joint scientific statement from the HFA TTS and Myocardial Function Working Group of the ESC—Part 2: vascular pathophysiology, gender and sex hormones, genetics, chronic cardiovascular problems and clinical implications. Eur J Heart Fail 2022;24:274–286. 465. Omerovic E, Citro R, Bossone E, Redfors B, Backs J, Bruns B, et al. Pathophysiology of Takotsubo syndrome—a joint scientific statement from the HFA TTS Study Group and Myocardial Function Working Group of the ESC—Part 1: overview and the central role for catecholamines and sympathetic nervous system. Eur J Heart Fail 2022;24:257–273. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

466. Couch LS, Fiedler J, Chick G, Clayton R, Dries E, Wienecke LM, et al. Circulating microRNAs predispose to Takotsubo syndrome following high-dose adrenaline exposure. Cardiovasc Res 2022;118:1758–1770. 467. Ghadri J-R, Wittstein IS, Prasad A, Sharkey S, Dote K, Akashi YJ, et al. International expert consensus document on Takotsubo syndrome (part II): diagnostic workup, outcome, and management. Eur Heart J 2018;39:2047–2062. 468. Ghadri J-R, Wittstein IS, Prasad A, Sharkey S, Dote K, Akashi YJ, et al. International expert consensus document on Takotsubo syndrome (part I): clinical characteristics, diagnostic criteria, and pathophysiology. Eur Heart J 2018;39:2032–2046. 469. Lyon AR, Bossone E, Schneider B, Sechtem U, Citro R, Underwood SR, et al. Current state of knowledge on Takotsubo syndrome: a Position Statement from the Taskforce on Takotsubo Syndrome of the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur J Heart Fail 2016;18:8–27. 470. Demers M, Krause DS, Schatzberg D, Martinod K, Voorhees JR, Fuchs TA, et al. Cancers predispose neutrophils to release extracellular DNA traps that contribute to cancer-associated thrombosis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2012;109:13076–13081. 471. Mrotzek SM, Lena A, Hadzibegovic S, Ludwig R, Al-Rashid F, Mahabadi AA, et al. Assessment of coronary artery disease during hospitalization for cancer treatment. Clin Res Cardiol 2021;110:200–210. 472. Nykl R, Fischer O, Vykoupil K, Taborsky M. A unique reason for coronary spasm causing temporary ST elevation myocardial infarction (inferior STEMI)—systemic inflammatory response syndrome after use of pembrolizumab. Arch Med Sci Atheroscler Dis 2017;2:100–102. 473. Ferreira M, Pichon E, Carmier D, Bouquet E, Pageot C, Bejan-Angoulvant T, et al. Coronary toxicities of anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 immunotherapies: a case report and review of the literature and international registries. Target Oncol 2018;13: 509–515. 474. Iannaccone M, D’Ascenzo F, Vadalà P, Wilton SB, Noussan P, Colombo F, et al. Prevalence and outcome of patients with cancer and acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a BleeMACS substudy. Eur Heart Journal Acute Cardiovasc Care 2018;7:631–638. 475. Bharadwaj A, Potts J, Mohamed MO, Parwani P, Swamy P, Lopez-Mattei JC, et al. Acute myocardial infarction treatments and outcomes in 6.5 million patients with a current or historical diagnosis of cancer in the USA. Eur Heart J 2020;41: 2183–2193. 476. Velders MA, Boden H, Hofma SH, Osanto S, Van Der Hoeven BL, Heestermans AACM, et al. Outcome after ST elevation myocardial infarction in patients with cancer treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol 2013;112:1867–1872. 477. Ueki Y, Vögeli B, Karagiannis A, Zanchin T, Zanchin C, Rhyner D, et al. Ischemia and bleeding in cancer patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. JACC CardioOncology 2019;1:145–155. 478. Potts JE, Iliescu CA, Lopez Mattei JC, Martinez SC, Holmvang L, Ludman P, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention in cancer patients: a report of the prevalence and outcomes in the United States. Eur Heart J 2019;40:1790–1800. 479. Guddati AK, Joy PS, Kumar G. Analysis of outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention in metastatic cancer patients with acute coronary syndrome over a 10-year period. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2016;142:471–479. 480. Pothineni NV, Shah NN, Rochlani Y, Saad M, Kovelamudi S, Marmagkiolis K, et al. Temporal trends and outcomes of acute myocardial infarction in patients with cancer. Ann Transl Med 2017;5:482. 481. Yusuf SW, Daraban N, Abbasi N, Lei X, Durand JB, Daher IN. Treatment and outcomes of acute coronary syndrome in the cancer population. Clin Cardiol 2012;35: 443–450. 482. Gevaert SA, Halvorsen S, Sinnaeve PR, Sambola A, Gulati G, Lancellotti P, et al. Evaluation and management of cancer patients presenting with acute cardiovascular disease: a Consensus Document of the Acute CardioVascular Care (ACVC) association and the ESC council of Cardio-Oncology—Part 1: acute coronary syndromes and acute pericardial diseases. Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care 2021; 10:947–959. 483. Mohamed MO, Van Spall HGC, Kontopantelis E, Alkhouli M, Barac A, Elgendy IY, et al. Effect of primary percutaneous coronary intervention on in-hospital outcomes among active cancer patients presenting with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a propensity score matching analysis. Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care 2021;10:829–839. 484. Iliescu CA, Grines CL, Herrmann J, Yang EH, Cilingiroglu M, Charitakis K, et al. SCAI Expert consensus statement: Evaluation, management, and special considerations of cardio-oncology patients in the cardiac catheterization laboratory (endorsed by the Cardiological Society of India, and Sociedad Latino Americana de Cardiologıa Intervencionista). Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2016;87:E202–E223. 485. Iliescu CA, Cilingiroglu M, Giza DE, Rosales O, Lebeau J, Guerrero-Mantilla I, et al. ‘Bringing on the light’ in a complex clinical scenario: optical coherence tomography–guided discontinuation of antiplatelet therapy in cancer patients with coronary artery disease (PROTECT-OCT registry). Am Heart J 2017;194:83–91. 486. Iliescu C, Balanescu DV, Donisan T, Giza DE, Muñoz Gonzalez ED, Cilingiroglu M, et al. Safety of diagnostic and therapeutic cardiac catheterization in cancer patients with acute coronary syndrome and chronic thrombocytopenia. Am J Cardiol 2018; 122:1465–1470. 487. Cianci G, Morelli MF, Cannita K, Morese R, Ricevuto E, Di Rocco ZC, et al. Prophylactic options in patients with 5-fluorouracil-associated cardiotoxicity. Br J Cancer 2003;88:1507–1509. 488. Ambrosy AP, Kunz PL, Fisher GA, Witteles RM. Capecitabine-induced chest pain relieved by diltiazem. Am J Cardiol 2012;110:1623–1626. 489. Akpek G, Hartshorn KL. Failure of oral nitrate and calcium channel blocker therapy to prevent 5-fluorouracil-related myocardial ischemia: a case report. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 1999;43:157–161. 490. Chang HM, Okwuosa TM, Scarabelli T, Moudgil R, Yeh ETH. Cardiovascular complications of cancer therapy: best practices in diagnosis, prevention, and management: part 2. J Am Coll Cardiol 2017;70:2552–2565. 491. Campia U, Moslehi JJ, Amiri-Kordestani L, Barac A, Beckman JA, Chism DD, et al. Cardio-oncology: vascular and metabolic perspectives: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2019;139:e579–e602. 492. Yeh ETH, Bickford CL. Cardiovascular complications of cancer therapy: incidence, pathogenesis, diagnosis, and management. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;53:2231–2247. 493. Lenneman CG, Sawyer DB. Cardio-oncology: an update on cardiotoxicity of cancer-related treatment. Circ Res 2016;118:1008–1020. 494. Novo G, Di Lisi D, Bronte E, MacAione F, Accurso V, Badalamenti G, et al. Cardiovascular toxicity in cancer patients treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors: a real-world single-center experience. Oncology 2020;98:445–451. 495. Bharadwaj AS, Swamy PM, Mamas MA. Outcomes of percutaneous coronary interventions in cancer patients. Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther 2020;18:25–32. 496. Kwok CS, Wong CW, Kontopantelis E, Barac A, Brown SA, Velagapudi P, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with cancer and readmissions within 90 days for acute myocardial infarction and bleeding in the USA. Eur Heart J 2021; 42:1019–1034. 497. van Werkum JW, Heestermans AA, Zomer AC, Kelder JC, Suttorp MJ, Rensing BJ, et al. Predictors of coronary stent thrombosis. The Dutch Stent Thrombosis Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;53:1399–1409. 498. Urban P, Mehran R, Colleran R, Angiolillo DJ, Byrne RA, Capodanno D, et al. Defining high bleeding risk in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Circulation 2019;140:240–261. 499. Stewart MH, Jahangir E, Polin NM. Valvular heart disease in cancer patients: etiology, diagnosis, and management. Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med 2017;19:53. 500. Hull MC, Morris CG, Pepine CJ, Mendenhall NP. Valvular dysfunction and carotid, subclavian, and coronary artery disease in survivors of Hodgkin lymphoma treated with radiation therapy. J Am Med Assoc 2003;290:2831–2837. 501. Salz T, Zabor EC, de Nully Brown P, Dalton SO, Raghunathan NJ, Matasar MJ, et al. Preexisting cardiovascular risk and subsequent heart failure among non-Hodgkin lymphoma survivors. J Clin Oncol 2017;35:3837–3843. 502. Serrano C, Cortés J, De Mattos-Arruda L, Bellet M, Gómez P, Saura C, et al. Trastuzumab-related cardiotoxicity in the elderly: a role for cardiovascular risk factors. Ann Oncol 2012;23:897–902. 503. Sato A, Yoshihisa A, Miyata-Tatsumi M, Oikawa M, Kobayashi A, Ishida T, et al. Valvular heart disease as a possible predictor of trastuzumab-induced cardiotoxicity in patients with breast cancer. Mol Clin Oncol 2019;10:37–42. 504. Watanabe Y, Kozuma K, Hioki H, Kawashima H, Nara Y, Kataoka A, et al. Comparison of results of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with versus without active cancer. Am J Cardiol 2016;118:572–577. 505. Nagata H, Kanzaki R, Kanou T, Ose N, Funaki S, Shintani Y, et al. Two cases of lobectomy for lung cancer after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Surg Case Reports 2018;4:139. 506. Landes U, Iakobishvili Z, Vronsky D, Zusman O, Barsheshet A, Jaffe R, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in oncology patients with severe aortic stenosis. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2019;12:78–86. 507. Vahanian A, Beyersdorf F, Praz F, Milojevic M, Baldus S, Bauersachs J, et al. 2021 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. Eur Heart J 2022;43:561–632. 508. López-Fernández T, Martín-García A, Roldán Rabadán I, Mitroi C, Mazón Ramos P, Díez-Villanueva P, et al. Atrial fibrillation in active cancer patients: expert position paper and recommendations. Rev Española Cardiol (English Ed) 2019;72:749–759. 509. Farmakis D, Parissis J, Filippatos G. Insights into onco-cardiology: atrial fibrillation in cancer. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014;63:945–953. 510. Yun JP, Choi EK, Do Han K, Park SH, Jung JH, Park SH, et al. Risk of atrial fibrillation according to cancer type: a nationwide population-based study. JACC CardioOncology 2021;3:221–232. 511. Guha A, Fradley MG, Dent SF, Weintraub NL, Lustberg MB, Alonso A, et al. Incidence, risk factors, and mortality of atrial fibrillation in breast cancer: a SEER-Medicare analysis. Eur Heart J 2021;43:300–312. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

512. Hu YF, Liu CJ, Chang PMH, Tsao HM, Lin YJ, Chang SL, et al. Incident thromboembolism and heart failure associated with new-onset atrial fibrillation in cancer patients. Int J Cardiol 2013;165:355–357. 513. Mosarla RC, Vaduganathan M, Qamar A, Moslehi J, Piazza G, Giugliano RP. Anticoagulation strategies in patients with cancer: JACC review topic of the week. J Am Coll Cardiol 2019;73:1336–1349. 514. Malavasi VL, Fantecchi E, Gianolio L, Pesce F, Longo G, Marietta M, et al. Atrial fibrillation in patients with active malignancy and use of anticoagulants: underprescription but no adverse impact on all-cause mortality. Eur J Intern Med 2019; 59:27–33. 515. Al-Kindi SG, Oliveira GH. Prevalence of preexisting cardiovascular disease in patients with different types of cancer the unmet need for onco-cardiology. Mayo Clin Proc 2016;91:81–83. 516. Alexandre J, Moslehi JJ, Bersell KR, Funck-Brentano C, Roden DM, Salem JE. Anticancer drug-induced cardiac rhythm disorders: current knowledge and basic underlying mechanisms. Pharmacol Ther 2018;189:89–103. 517. Boriani G, Corradini P, Cuneo A, Falanga A, Foà R, Gaidano G, et al. Practical management of ibrutinib in the real life: focus on atrial fibrillation and bleeding. Hematol Oncol 2018;36:624–632. 518. Tang CPS, Lip GYH, McCormack T, Lyon AR, Hillmen P, Iyengar S, et al. Management of cardiovascular complications of Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Br J Haematol 2022;196:70–78. 519. Pastori D, Marang A, Bisson A, Menichelli D, Herbert J, Lip GYH, et al. Thromboembolism, mortality, and bleeding in 2,435,541 atrial fibrillation patients with and without cancer: a nationwide cohort study. Cancer 2021;127:2122–2129. 520. Potpara TS, Lip GYH, Blomstrom-Lundqvist C, Boriani G, Van Gelder IC, Heidbuchel H, et al. The 4S-AF scheme (Stroke Risk; Symptoms; Severity of Burden; Substrate): a novel approach to in-depth characterization (rather than classification) of atrial fibrillation. Thromb Haemost 2021;121:270–278. 521. Boriani G, Bonini N, Albini A, Venturelli A, Imberti JF, Vitolo M. Cardioversion of recent-onset atrial fibrillation: current evidence, practical considerations, and controversies in a complex clinical scenario. Kardiol Pol 2020;78:1088–1098. 522. Kanmanthareddy A, Vallakati A, Reddy Yeruva M, Dixit S, Di Biase L, Mansour M, et al. Pulmonary vein isolation for atrial fibrillation in the postpneumonectomy population: a feasibility, safety, and outcomes study. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2015;26:385–389. 523. Lip GYH, Banerjee A, Boriani G, En Chiang C, Fargo R, Freedman B, et al. Antithrombotic therapy for atrial fibrillation: CHEST guideline and expert panel report. Chest 2018;154:1121–1201. 524. Proietti M, Lane DA, Boriani G, Lip GYH. Stroke prevention, evaluation of bleeding risk, and anticoagulant treatment management in atrial fibrillation contemporary international guidelines. Can J Cardiol 2019;35:619–633. 525. Boriani G, Lee G, Parrini I, Lopez-Fernandez T, Lyon AR, Suter T, et al. Anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation and active cancer: an international survey on patient management. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2021;28:611–621. 526. D’Souza M, Carlson N, Fosbøl E, Lamberts M, Smedegaard L, Nielsen D, et al. CHA2DS2-VASC score and risk of thromboembolism and bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation and recent cancer. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2018;25:651–658. 527. Farmakis D. Anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation in active cancer: what the cardiologists think. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2021;28:608–610. 528. Cohen A, Donal E, Delgado V, Pepi M, Tsang T, Gerber B, et al. EACVI recommendations on cardiovascular imaging for the detection of embolic sources: endorsed by the Canadian Society of Echocardiography. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 2021; 22:E24–E57. 529. Schulman S, Anger SU, Bergqvist D, Eriksson B, Lassen MR, Fisher W. Definition of major bleeding in clinical investigations of antihemostatic medicinal products in surgical patients. J Thromb Haemost 2010;8:202–204. 530. Steffel J, Collins R, Antz M, Cornu P, Desteghe L, Haeusler KG, et al. 2021 European Heart Rhythm Association practical guide on the use of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation. Europace 2021;23:1612–1676. 531. Chen ST, Hellkamp AS, Becker RC, Berkowitz SD, Breithardt G, Fox KAA, et al. Efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban vs. warfarin in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and a history of cancer: Observations from ROCKET AF. Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes 2019;5:145–152. 532. Melloni C, Dunning A, Granger CB, Thomas L, Khouri MG, Garcia DA, et al. Efficacy and safety of apixaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation and a history of cancer: insights from the ARISTOTLE trial. Am J Med 2017;130:1440–1448.e1. 533. Fanola CL, Ruff CT, Murphy SA, Jin J, Duggal A, Babilonia NA, et al. Efficacy and safety of edoxaban in patients with active malignancy and atrial fibrillation: analysis of the engage AF-TIMI 48 trial. J Am Heart Assoc 2018;7:e008987. 534. Sawant AC, Kumar A, McCray W, Tetewsky S, Parone L, Sridhara S, et al. Superior safety of direct oral anticoagulants compared to warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation and underlying cancer: a national Veterans Affairs database study. J Geriatr Cardiol 2019;16:706–709. 535. Shah S, Norby FL, Datta YH, Lutsey PL, MacLehose RF, Chen LY, et al. Comparative effectiveness of direct oral anticoagulants and warfarin in patients with cancer and atrial fibrillation. Blood Adv 2018;2:200–209. 536. Mariani MV, Magnocavallo M, Straito M, Piro A, Severino P, Iannucci G, et al. Direct oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonists in patients with atrial fibrillation and cancer a meta-analysis. J Thromb Thrombolysis 2021;51:419–429. 537. Deitelzweig S, Keshishian AV, Zhang Y, Kang A, Dhamane AD, Luo X, et al. Effectiveness and safety of oral anticoagulants among nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients with active cancer. JACC CardioOncology 2021;3:411–424. 538. Lin YS, Kuan FC, Chao TF, Wu M, Chen SW, Chen MC, et al. Mortality associated with the use of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in cancer patients: dabigatran versus rivaroxaban. Cancer Med 2021;10:7079–7088. 539. Isogai T, Saad AM, Abushouk AI, Shekhar S, Kuroda S, Gad MM, et al. Procedural and short-term outcomes of percutaneous left atrial appendage closure in patients with cancer. Am J Cardiol 2021;141:154–157. 540. Boriani G, Fauchier L, Aguinaga L, Beattie JM, Blomstrom Lundqvist C, Cohen A, et al. European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) consensus document on management of arrhythmias and cardiac electronic devices in the critically ill and postsurgery patient, endorsed by Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), Cardiac Arrhythmia Society of Southern Africa (CASSA), and Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). Europace 2019; 21:7–8. 541. Butt JH, Olesen JB, Havers-Borgersen E, Gundlund A, Andersson C, Gislason GH, et al. Risk of thromboembolism associated with atrial fibrillation following noncardiac surgery. J Am Coll Cardiol 2018;72:2027–2036. 542. Enriquez A, Biagi J, Redfearn D, Boles U, Kamel D, Ali FS, et al. Increased incidence of ventricular arrhythmias in patients with advanced cancer and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators. JACC Clin Electrophysiol 2017;3:50–56. 543. Roden DM. Predicting drug-induced QT prolongation and torsades de pointes. J Physiol 2016;594:2459–2468. 544. Al-Khatib SM, Stevenson WG, Ackerman MJ, Bryant WJ, Callans DJ, Curtis AB, et al. 2017 AHA/ACC/HRS guideline for management of patients with ventricular arrhythmias and the prevention of sudden cardiac death: Executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society. Heart Rhythm 2018;15:e190–e252. 545. Schwartz PJ, Moss AJ, Vincent GM, Crampton RS. Diagnostic criteria for the long QT syndrome. An update. Circulation 1993;88:782–784. 546. Tisdale JE, Chung MK, Campbell KB, Hammadah M, Joglar JA, Leclerc J, et al. Drug-induced arrhythmias: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2020;142:E214–E233. 547. AZCERT. CredibleMeds.org n.d. 548. Coppola C, Rienzo A, Piscopo G, Barbieri A, Arra C, Maurea N. Management of QT prolongation induced by anti-cancer drugs: target therapy and old agents. Different algorithms for different drugs. Cancer Treat Rev 2018;63:135–143. 549. European Medicines Agency. ICH guideline E14/S7B on clinical and nonclinical evaluation of QT/QTc interval prolongation and proarrhythmic potential—questions & answers. Sci Med Heal 2020:EMA/CHMP/ICH/415588/2020. 550. Atallah-Yunes SA, Kadado AJ, Kaufman GP, Hernandez-Montfort J. Immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy and myocarditis: a systematic review of reported cases. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2019;145:1527–1557. 551. Cirne F, Zhou S, Kappel C, El-Kadi A, Barron CC, Ellis PM, et al. ALK inhibitorinduced bradycardia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lung Cancer 2021; 161:9–17. 552. Hassen LJ, Lenihan DJ, Baliga RR. Hypertension in the cardio-oncology clinic. Heart Fail Clin 2019;15:487–495. 553. Szmit S, Jurczak W, Zaucha JM, Drozd-Sokołowska J, Spychałowicz W, Joks M, et al. Pre-existing arterial hypertension as a risk factor for early left ventricular systolic dysfunction following (R)-CHOP chemotherapy in patients with lymphoma. J Am Soc Hypertens 2014;8:791–799. 554. Di Lorenzo G, Autorino R, Bruni G, Cartentì G, Ricevuto E, Tudini M, et al. Cardiovascular toxicity following sunitinib therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a multicenter analysis. Ann Oncol 2009;20:1535–1542. 555. Penttilä P, Rautiola J, Poussa T, Peltola K, Bono P. Angiotensin inhibitors as treatment of sunitinib/pazopanib-induced hypertension in metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2017;15:384–390.e3. 556. Izzedine H, Derosa L, Le Teuff G, Albiges L, Escudier B. Hypertension and angiotensin system inhibitors: impact on outcome in sunitinib-treated patients for metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Ann Oncol 2015;26:1128–1133. 557. McKay RR, Rodriguez GE, Lin X, Kaymakcalan MD, Hamnvik OPR, Sabbisetti VS, et al. Angiotensin system inhibitors and survival outcomes in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res 2015;21:2471–2479. 558. Khorana AA, Francis CW, Culakova E, Kuderer NM, Lyman GH. Thromboembolism is a leading cause of death in cancer patients receiving outpatient chemotherapy. J Thromb Haemost 2007;5:632–634. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

559. Puurunen MK, Gona PN, Larson MG, Murabito JM, Magnani JW, O’Donnell CJ. Epidemiology of venous thromboembolism in the Framingham Heart Study. Thromb Res 2016;145:27–33. 560. Walker AJ, Card TR, West J, Crooks C, Grainge MJ. Incidence of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer—a cohort study using linked United Kingdom databases. Eur J Cancer 2013;49:1404–1413. 561. Lyman GH. Venous thromboembolism in the patient with cancer: focus on burden of disease and benefits of thromboprophylaxis. Cancer 2011;117:1334–1349. 562. Abdulla A, Davis WM, Ratnaweera N, Szefer E, Ballantyne Scott B, Lee AYY. A meta-analysis of case fatality rates of recurrent venous thromboembolism and major bleeding in patients with cancer. Thromb Haemost 2020;120:702–713. 563. Mulder FI, Carrier M, van Doormaal F, Robin P, Otten HM, Salaun PY, et al. Risk scores for occult cancer in patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism: results from an individual patient data meta-analysis. J Thromb Haemost 2020;18: 2622–2628. 564. Khorana AA, Connolly GC. Assessing risk of venous thromboembolism in the patient with cancer. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:4839–4847. 565. Li X, Hu Y, Lin P, Zhang J, Tang Y, Yi Q, et al. Comparison of different clinical prognostic scores in patients with pulmonary embolism and active cancer. Thromb Haemost 2021;121:834–844. 566. Konstantinides SV, Meyer G, Bueno H, Galié N, Gibbs JSR, Ageno W, et al. 2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism developed in collaboration with the European Respiratory Society (ERS). Eur Heart J 2020;41:543–603. 567. Mazzolai L, Ageno W, Alatri A, Bauersachs R, Becattini C, Brodmann M, et al. Second consensus document on diagnosis and management of acute deep vein thrombosis: updated document elaborated by the ESC Working Group on aorta and peripheral vascular diseases and the ESC Working Group on pulmonary circulation and right ventricular function. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2022;29:1248–1263 568. Navi BB, Reiner AS, Kamel H, Iadecola C, Okin PM, Elkind MS V, et al. Risk of arterial thromboembolism in patients with cancer. J Am Coll Cardiol 2017;70:926–938. 569. Mukai M, Oka T. Mechanism and management of cancer-associated thrombosis. J Cardiol 2018;72:89–93. 570. Armstrong GT, Plana JC, Zhang N, Srivastava D, Green DM, Ness KK, et al. Screening adult survivors of childhood cancer for cardiomyopathy: comparison of echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. J Clin Oncol 2012; 30:2876–2884. 571. Hooks M, Okasha O, Velangi PS, Nijjar PS, Farzaneh-Far A, Shenoy C. Left ventricular thrombus on cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging in non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 2020. doi:10.1093/ehjci/jeaa244. Online ahead of print 7 October 2020. 572. Lee AYY, Levine MN, Baker RI, Bowden C, Kakkar AK, Prins M, et al. Low-molecular-weight heparin versus a coumarin for the prevention of recurrent venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer. N Engl J Med 2003;349:146–153. 573. Hull RD, Pineo GF, Brant RF, Mah AF, Burke N, Dear R, et al. Long-term low-molecular-weight heparin versus usual care in proximal-vein thrombosis patients with cancer. Am J Med 2006;119:1062–1072. 574. Deitcher SR, Kessler CM, Merli G, Rigas JR, Lyons RM, Fareed J. Secondary prevention of venous thromboembolic events in patients with active cancer: enoxaparin alone versus initial enoxaparin followed by warfarin for a 180-day period. Clin Appl Thromb 2006;12:389–396. 575. Meyer G, Marjanovic Z, Valcke J, Lorcerie B, Gruel Y, Solal-Celigny P, et al. Comparison of low-molecular-weight heparin and warfarin for the secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer: a randomized controlled study. Arch Intern Med 2002;162:1729–1735. 576. Lee AYY, Kamphuisen PW, Meyer G, Bauersachs R, Janas MS, Jarner MF, et al. Tinzaparin vs warfarin for treatment of acute venous thromboembolism in patients with active cancer: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA J Am Med Assoc 2015;314: 677–686. 577. Lee YJ, Park JK, Uhm JS, Kim JY, Pak HN, Lee MH, et al. Bleeding risk and major adverse events in patients with cancer on oral anticoagulation therapy. Int J Cardiol 2016;203:372–378. 578. Raskob GE, van Es N, Verhamme P, Carrier M, Di Nisio M, Garcia D, et al. Edoxaban for the treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism. N Engl J Med 2018;378:615–624. 579. Young AM, Marshall A, Thirlwall J, Chapman O, Lokare A, Hill C, et al. Comparison of an oral factor Xa inhibitor with low molecular weight heparin in patients with cancer with venous thromboembolism: results of a randomized trial (SELECT-D). J Clin Oncol 2018;36:2017–2023. 580. McBane II RD, Wysokinski WE, Le-Rademacher JG, Zemla T, Ashrani A, Tafur A, et al. Apixaban and dalteparin in active malignancy-associated venous thromboembolism: the ADAM VTE trial. J Thromb Haemost 2020;18:411–421. 581. Agnelli G, Becattini C, Meyer G, Muñoz A, Huisman M V, Connors JM, et al. Apixaban for the treatment of venous thromboembolism associated with cancer. N Engl J Med 2020;382:1599–1607. 582. Ay C, Beyer-Westendorf J, Pabinger I. Treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism in the age of direct oral anticoagulants. Ann Oncol 2019;30: 897–907. 583. Ageno W, Vedovati MC, Cohen A, Huisman M, Bauersachs R, Gussoni G, et al. Bleeding with apixaban and dalteparin in patients with cancer-associated venous thromboembolism: results from the Caravaggio study. Thromb Haemost 2021; 121:616–624. 584. Cohen A, Keshishian A, Lee T, Wygant G, Rosenblatt L, Hlavacek P, et al. Effectiveness and safety of apixaban, low-molecular-weight heparin, and warfarin among venous thromboembolism patients with active cancer: a US claims data analysis. Thromb Haemost 2021;121:383–395. 585. Giustozzi M, Agnelli G, Del Toro-Cervera J, Klok FA, Rosovsky RP, Martin AC, et al. Direct oral anticoagulants for the treatment of acute venous thromboembolism associated with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Thromb Haemost 2020; 120:1128–1136. 586. Sabatino J, De Rosa S, Polimeni A, Sorrentino S, IndolfiC. Direct oral anticoagulants in patients with active cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JACC CardioOncology 2020;2:428–440. 587. Kraaijpoel N, Carrier M. How I treat cancer-associated venous thromboembolism. Blood 2019;133:291–298. 588. Den Exter PL, Hooijer J, Dekkers OM, Huisman M V. Risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism and mortality in patients with cancer incidentally diagnosed with pulmonary embolism: a comparison with symptomatic patients. J Clin Oncol 2011;29:2405–2409. 589. Jara-Palomares L, Solier-Lopez A, Elias-Hernandez T, Asensio-Cruz M, Blasco-Esquivias I, Marin-Barrera L, et al. Tinzaparin in cancer associated thrombosis beyond 6 months: TiCAT study. Thromb Res 2017;157:90–96. 590. Francis CW, Kessler CM, Goldhaber SZ, Kovacs MJ, Monreal M, Huisman M V, et al. Treatment of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients with dalteparin for up to 12 months: the DALTECAN Study. J Thromb Haemost 2015;13:1028–1035. 591. Otto CM, Nishimura RA, Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Erwin JP, Gentile F, et al. 2020 ACC/AHA guideline for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 2021;77:e25–e197. 592. Riondino S, Ferroni P, Del Monte G, Formica V, Guadagni F, Roselli M. Venous thromboembolism in cancer patients on simultaneous and palliative care. Cancers (Basel) 2020;12:1167. 593. Xin Z, Liu F, Du Y, Mao F, Wang X, Xu P, et al. Primary prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in ambulatory cancer patients: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Ann Cardiothorac Surg 2020;9:2970–2981. 594. Farge D, Frere C, Connors JM, Ay C, Khorana AA, Munoz A, et al. 2019 international clinical practice guidelines for the treatment and prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer. Lancet Oncol 2019;20:e566–e581. 595. Bergqvist D, Agnelli G, Cohen AT, Eldor A, Nilsson PE, Le Moigne-Amrani A, et al. Duration of prophylaxis against venous thromboembolism with enoxaparin after surgery for cancer. N Engl J Med 2002;346:975–980. 596. Khorana A, Kuderer NM, Culakova E, Lyman GH, Francis CW. Development and validation of a predictive model for chemotherapy-associated thrombosis. Blood 2008;111:4902–4907. 597. Gerotziafas GT, Taher A, Abdel-Razeq H, AboElnazar E, Spyropoulos AC, El Shemmari S, et al. A predictive score for thrombosis associated with breast, colorectal, lung, or ovarian cancer: the prospective COMPASS–cancer-associated thrombosis study. Oncologist 2017;22:1222–1231. 598. Agnelli G, Gussoni G, Bianchini C, Verso M, Mandalà M, Cavanna L, et al. Nadroparin for the prevention of thromboembolic events in ambulatory patients with metastatic or locally advanced solid cancer receiving chemotherapy: a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind study. Lancet Oncol 2009;10:943–949. 599. Agnelli G, George DJ, Kakkar AK, Fisher W, Lassen MR, Mismetti P, et al. Semuloparin for thromboprophylaxis in patients receiving chemotherapy for cancer. N Engl J Med 2012;366:601–609. 600. Di Nisio M, Porreca E, Candeloro M, De Tursi M, Russi I, Rutjes AWSS. Primary prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016;12:CD008500. 601. Carrier M, Abou-Nassar K, Mallick R, Tagalakis V, Shivakumar S, Schattner A, et al. Apixaban to prevent venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer. N Engl J Med 2019;380:711–719. 602. Khorana AA, Soff GA, Kakkar AK, Vadhan-Raj S, Riess H, Wun T, et al. Rivaroxaban for thromboprophylaxis in high-risk ambulatory patients with cancer. N Engl J Med 2019;380:720–728. 603. Angelini DE, Radivoyevitch T, McCrae KR, Khorana AA. Bleeding incidence and risk factors among cancer patients treated with anticoagulation. Am J Hematol 2019;94: 780–785. 604. Menapace LA, McCrae KR, Khorana AA. Predictors of recurrent venous thromboembolism and bleeding on anticoagulation. Thromb Res 2016;140:S93–S98. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

605. Roule V, Verdier L, Blanchart K, Ardouin P, Lemaitre A, Bignon M, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the prognostic impact of cancer among patients with acute coronary syndrome and/or percutaneous coronary intervention. BMC Cardiovasc Disord 2020;20:38. 606. Freedberg DE, Kim LS, Yang YX. The risks and benefits of long-term use of proton pump inhibitors: expert review and best practice advice from the American Gastroenterological Association. Gastroenterology 2017;152:706–715. 607. Valgimigli M, Bueno H, Byrne RA, Collet JP, Costa F, Jeppsson A, et al. 2017 ESC focused update on dual antiplatelet therapy in coronary artery disease developed in collaboration with EACTS. Eur Heart J 2018;39:213–260. 608. Baran DA, Grines CL, Bailey S, Burkhoff D, Hall SA, Henry TD, et al. SCAI clinical expert consensus statement on the classification of cardiogenic shock: This document was endorsed by the American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American Heart Association (AHA), the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM), and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) in April 2019. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2019;94:29–37. 609. Schiffer CA, Bohlke K, Anderson KC. Platelet transfusion for patients with cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update Summary. J Oncol Pract 2018;14:129–133. 610. Al-Samkari H, Connors JM. Managing the competing risks of thrombosis, bleeding, and anticoagulation in patients with malignancy. Blood Adv 2019;3:3770–3779. 611. Parr SK, Liang J, Schadler KL, Gilchrist SC, Steele CC, Ade CJ. Anticancer therapy-related increases in arterial stiffness: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Heart Assoc 2020;9:e015598. 612. Gambichler T, Strutzmann S, Tannapfel A, Susok L. Paraneoplastic acral vascular syndrome in a patient with metastatic melanoma under immune checkpoint blockade. BMC Cancer 2017;17:327. 613. Aichberger KJ, Herndlhofer S, Schernthaner GH, Schillinger M, Mitterbauer-Hohendanner G, Sillaber C, et al. Progressive peripheral arterial occlusive disease and other vascular events during nilotinib therapy in CML. Am J Hematol 2011;86:533–539. 614. Dorer DJ, Knickerbocker RK, Baccarani M, Cortes JE, Hochhaus A, Talpaz M, et al. Impact of dose intensity of ponatinib on selected adverse events: multivariate analyses from a pooled population of clinical trial patients. Leuk Res 2016;48:84–91. 615. Valent P, Hadzijusufovic E, Schernthaner GH, Wolf D, Rea D, Le Coutre P. Vascular safety issues in CML patients treated with BCR/ABL1 kinase inhibitors. Blood 2015; 125:901–906. 616. Montani D, Bergot E, Günther S, Savale L, Bergeron A, Bourdin A, et al. Pulmonary arterial hypertension in patients treated by dasatinib. Circulation 2012;125: 2128–2137. 617. Ranchoux B, Günther S, Quarck R, Chaumais MC, Dorfmüller P, Antigny F, et al. Chemotherapy-induced pulmonary hypertension: role of alkylating agents. Am J Pathol 2015;185:356–371. 618. Jevnikar M, Montani D, Savale L, Seferian A, Jutant EM, Boucly A, et al. Chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension and totally implantable central venous access systems. Eur Respir J 2021;57:2002208. 619. Price LC, Seckl MJ, Dorfmüller P, Wort SJ. Tumoral pulmonary hypertension. Eur Respir Rev 2019;28:180065. 620. Humbert M, Kovacs G, Hoeper MM, Badagliacca R, Berger RMF, Brida M, et al. 2022 ESC/ERS Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary hypertension. Eur Heart J 2022;43:3618–3731. 621. Kantarjian H, Shah NP, Hochhaus A, Cortes J, Shah S, Ayala M, et al. Dasatinib versus imatinib in newly diagnosed chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med 2010;362:2260–2270. 622. Imazio M, Colopi M, De Ferrari GM. Pericardial diseases in patients with cancer: Contemporary prevalence, management and outcomes. Heart 2020;106:569–574. 623. Kim SR, Kim EK, Cho J, Chang SA, Park SJ, Lee SC, et al. Effect of anti-inflammatory drugs on clinical outcomes in patients with malignant pericardial effusion. J Am Coll Cardiol 2020;76:1551–1561. 624. Gong J, Drobni ZD, Zafar A, Quinaglia T, Hartmann S, Gilman HK, et al. Pericardial disease in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. J Immunother Cancer 2021;9:e002771. 625. Inno A, Maurea N, Metro G, Carbone A, Russo A, Gori S. Immune checkpoint inhibitors-associated pericardial disease: a systematic review of case reports. Cancer Immunol Immunother 2021;70:3041–3053. 626. Sánchez-Enrique C, Nuñez-Gil IJ, Viana-Tejedor A, De Agustín A, Vivas D, Palacios-Rubio J, et al. Cause and long-term outcome of cardiac tamponade. Am J Cardiol 2016;117:664–669. 627. Saab J, Hoda RS, Narula N, Hoda SA, Geraghty BE, Nasar A, et al. Diagnostic yield of cytopathology in evaluating pericardial effusions: clinicopathologic analysis of 419 specimens. Cancer Cytopathol 2017;125:128–137. 628. Patel N, Rafique AM, Eshaghian S, Mendoza F, Biner S, Cercek B, et al. Retrospective comparison of outcomes, diagnostic value, and complications of percutaneous prolonged drainage versus surgical pericardiotomy of pericardial effusion associated with malignancy. Am J Cardiol 2013;112:1235–1239. 629. Palaskas N, Morgan J, Daigle T, Banchs J, Durand JB, Hong D, et al. Targeted cancer therapies with pericardial effusions requiring pericardiocentesis focusing on immune checkpoint inhibitors. Am J Cardiol 2019;123:1351–1357. 630. Shaheen S, Mirshahidi H, Nagaraj G, Hsueh CT. Conservative management of nivolumab-induced pericardial effusion: a case report and review of literature. Exp Hematol Oncol 2018;7:11. 631. Dixon SB, Howell CR, Lu L, Plana JC, Joshi VM, Luepker R V, et al. Cardiac biomarkers and association with subsequent cardiomyopathy and mortality among adult survivors of childhood cancer: a report from the St. Jude Lifetime Cohort. Cancer 2021;127:458–466. 632. Hershman DL, Till C, Shen S, Wright JD, Ramsey SD, Barlow WE, et al. Association of cardiovascular risk factors with cardiac events and survival outcomes among patients with breast cancer enrolled in SWOG clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 2018;36: 2710–2717. 633. Nolan MT, Marwick TH, Plana JC, Li Z, Ness KK, Joshi VM, et al. Effect of traditional heart failure risk factors on myocardial dysfunction in adult survivors of childhood cancer. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2018;11:1202–1203. 634. Cho H, Lee S, Sim SH, Park IH, Lee KS, Kwak MH, et al. Cumulative incidence of chemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity during a 2-year follow-up period in breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2020;182:333–343. 635. Smarz K, Jaxa-Chamiec T, Chwyczko T, Główczyńska R, Jegier A, Niedoszytko P, et al. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing in adult cardiology: expert opinion of the Working Group of Cardiac Rehabilitation and Exercise Physiology of the Polish Cardiac Society. Kardiol Pol 2019;77:730–756. 636. Scott JM, Zabor EC, Schwitzer E, Koelwyn GJ, Adams SC, Nilsen TS, et al. Efficacy of exercise therapy on cardiorespiratory fitness in patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Oncol 2018;36:2297–2304. 637. Sasso JP, Eves ND, Christensen JF, Koelwyn GJ, Scott J, Jones LW. A framework for prescription in exercise-oncology research. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle 2015;6: 115–124. 638. Wallen MP, Hennessy D, Brown S, Evans L, Rawstorn JC, Wong Shee A, et al. High-intensity interval training improves cardiorespiratory fitness in cancer patients and survivors: a meta-analysis. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 2020;29:e13267. 639. Lee K, Tripathy D, Demark-Wahnefried W, Courneya KS, Sami N, Bernstein L, et al. Effect of aerobic and resistance exercise intervention on cardiovascular disease risk in women with early-stage breast cancer: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol 2019;5:710–714. 640. Adams SC, Delorey DS, Davenport MH, Fairey AS, North S, Courneya KS. Effects of high-intensity interval training on fatigue and quality of life in testicular cancer survivors. Br J Cancer 2018;118:1313–1321. 641. Mijwel S, Jervaeus A, Bolam KA, Norrbom J, Bergh J, Rundqvist H, et al. High-intensity exercise during chemotherapy induces beneficial effects 12 months into breast cancer survivorship. J Cancer Surviv 2019;13:244–256. 642. Marriott CFS, Petrella AFM, Marriott ECS, Boa Sorte Silva NC, Petrella RJ. High-intensity interval training in older adults: a scoping review. Sport Med - Open 2021;7:49. 643. Barac A, Murtagh G, Carver JR, Chen MH, Freeman AM, Herrmann J, et al. Cardiovascular health of patients with cancer and cancer survivors: a roadmap to the next level. J Am Coll Cardiol 2015;65:2739–2746. 644. Chu TF, Rupnick MA, Kerkela R, Dallabrida SM, Zurakowski D, Nguyen L, et al. Cardiotoxicity associated with tyrosine kinase inhibitor sunitinib. Lancet 2007; 370:2011–2019. 645. Khakoo AY, Kassiotis CM, Tannir N, Plana JC, Halushka M, Bickford C, et al. Heart failure associated with sunitinib malate: a multitargeted receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor. Cancer 2008;112:2500–2508. 646. Kim PY, Irizarry-Caro JA, Ramesh T, Iliescu C, Lopez-Mattei JC. How to diagnose and manage QT prolongation in cancer patients. JACC CardioOncology 2021;3: 145–149. 647. Gatta G, Botta L, Rossi S, Aareleid T, Bielska-Lasota M, Clavel J, et al. Childhood cancer survival in Europe 1999–2007: results of EUROCARE-5—a populationbased study. Lancet Oncol 2014;15:35–47. 648. Geenen MM, Cardous-Ubbink MC, Kremer LCM, Van Den Bos C, Van Der Pal HJH, Heinen RC, et al. Medical assessment of adverse health outcomes in long-term survivors of childhood cancer. J Am Med Assoc 2007;297:2705–2715. 649. Armenian SH, Armstrong GT, Aune G, Chow EJ, Ehrhardt MJ, Ky B, et al. Cardiovascular disease in survivors of childhood cancer: insights into epidemiology, pathophysiology, and prevention. J Clin Oncol 2018;36:2135–2144. 650. Fidler MM, Reulen RC, Henson K, Kelly J, Cutter D, Levitt GA, et al. Population-based long-term cardiac-specific mortality among 34 489 five-year survivors of childhood cancer in Great Britain. Circulation 2017;135:951–963. 651. Kremer LCM, van Dalen EC, Offringa M, Voûte PA. Frequency and risk factors of anthracycline-induced clinical heart failure in children: a systematic review. Ann Oncol 2002;13:503–512. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

652. Bates JE, Howell RM, Liu Q, Yasui Y, Mulrooney DA, Dhakal S, et al. Therapy-related cardiac risk in childhood cancer survivors: an analysis of the childhood cancer survivor study. J Clin Oncol 2019;37:1090–1101. 653. van Dalen EC, Mulder RL, Suh E, Ehrhardt MJ, Aune GJ, Bardi E, et al. Coronary artery disease surveillance among childhood, adolescent and young adult cancer survivors: a systematic review and recommendations from the International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group. Eur J Cancer 2021; 156:127–137. 654. Leerink JM, van der Pal HJH, Kremer LCM, Feijen EAM, Meregalli PG, Pourier MS, et al. Refining the 10-year prediction of left ventricular systolic dysfunction in longterm survivors of childhood cancer. JACC CardioOncology 2021;3:62–72. 655. Armstrong GT, Oeffinger KC, Chen Y, Kawashima T, Yasui Y, Leisenring W, et al. Modifiable risk factors and major cardiac events among adult survivors of childhood cancer. J Clin Oncol 2013;31:3673–3680. 656. Armenian SH, Sun CL, Vase T, Ness KK, Blum E, Francisco L, et al. Cardiovascular risk factors in hematopoietic cell transplantation survivors: role in development of subsequent cardiovascular disease. Blood 2012;120:4505–4512. 657. Carpenter K, Scavotto M, McGovern A, Ma C, Kenney LB, Mack JW, et al. Early parental knowledge of late effect risks in children with cancer. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2022;69:e29473. 658. Herrmann J. From trends to transformation: where cardio-oncology is to make a difference. Eur Heart J 2019;40:3898–3900. 659. Sturgeon KM, Deng L, Bluethmann SM, Zhou S, Trifiletti DM, Jiang C, et al. A population-based study of cardiovascular disease mortality risk in US cancer patients. Eur Heart J 2019;40:3889–3897. 660. Stoltzfus KC, Zhang Y, Sturgeon K, Sinoway LI, Trifiletti DM, Chinchilli VM, et al. Fatal heart disease among cancer patients. Nat Commun 2020;11:2011. 661. Banke A, Fosbøl EL, Møller JE, Gislason GH, Andersen M, Bernsdorf M, et al. Long-term effect of epirubicin on incidence of heart failure in women with breast cancer: insight from a randomized clinical trial. Eur J Heart Fail 2018;20:1447–1453. 662. Jacobse JN, Steggink LC, Sonke GS, Schaapveld M, Hummel YM, Steenbruggen TG, et al. Myocardial dysfunction in long-term breast cancer survivors treated at ages 40–50 years. Eur J Heart Fail 2020;22:338–346. 663. Boyne DJ, Mickle AT, Brenner DR, Friedenreich CM, Cheung WY, Tang KL, et al. Long-term risk of cardiovascular mortality in lymphoma survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Med 2018;7:4801–4813. 664. Darby SC, McGale P, Taylor CW, Peto R. Long-term mortality from heart disease and lung cancer after radiotherapy for early breast cancer: prospective cohort study of about 300 000 women in US SEER cancer registries. Lancet Oncol 2005; 6:557–565. 665. de Vries S, Schaapveld M, Janus CPM, Daniëls LA, Petersen EJ, van der Maazen RWM, et al. Long-term cause-specific mortality in Hodgkin lymphoma patients. J Natl Cancer Inst 2021;113:760–769. 666. Armenian SH, Yang D, Teh JB, Atencio LC, Gonzales A, Wong FL, et al. Prediction of cardiovascular disease among hematopoietic cell transplantation survivors. Blood Adv 2018;2:1756–1764. 667. Goldhirsch A, Gelber RD, Piccart-Gebhart MJ, De Azambuja E, Procter M, Suter TM, et al. 2 years versus 1 year of adjuvant trastuzumab for HER2-positive breast cancer (HERA): An open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2013;382: 1021–1028. 668. Advani PP, Ballman KV, Dockter TJ, Colon-Otero G, Perez EA. Long-term cardiac safety analysis of NCCTG N9831 (Alliance) adjuvant trastuzumab trial. J Clin Oncol 2016;34:581–587. 669. Pinder MC, Duan Z, Goodwin JS, Hortobagyi GN, Giordano SH. Congestive heart failure in older women treated with adjuvant anthracycline chemotherapy for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:3808–3815. 670. Lancellotti P, Nkomo VT, Badano LP, Bergler J, Bogaert J, Davin L, et al. Expert Consensus for multi-modality imaging evaluation of cardiovascular complications of radiotherapy in adults: a report from the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging and the American Society of Echocardiography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2013;26:1013–1032. 671. Tromp J, Boerman LM, Sama IE, Maass SWMC, Maduro JH, Hummel YM, et al. Long-term survivors of early breast cancer treated with chemotherapy are characterized by a pro-inflammatory biomarker profile compared to matched controls. Eur J Heart Fail 2020;22:1239–1246. 672. Cao Z, Xu C, Yang H, Li S, Wang Y. The role of healthy lifestyle in cancer incidence and temporal transitions to cardiometabolic disease. JACC CardioOncology 2021;3: 663–674. 673. Limat S, Daguindau E, Cahn JY, Nerich V, Brion A, Perrin S, et al. Incidence and riskfactors of CHOP/R-CHOP-related cardiotoxicity in patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. J Clin Pharm Ther 2014;39:168–174. 674. Hershman DL, McBride RB, Eisenberger A, Wei YT, Grann VR, Jacobson JS. Doxorubicin, cardiac risk factors, and cardiac toxicity in elderly patients with diffuse B-cell non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:3159–3165. 675. SOLVD Investigators, Yusuf S, Pitt B, Davis CE, Hood WB Jr, Cohn JN. Effect of enalapril on mortality and the development of heart failure in asymptomatic patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fractions. N Engl J Med 1992;327: 685–691. 676. Pfeffer MA, Braunwald E, Moyé LA, Basta L, Brown EJ, Cuddy TE, et al. Effect of captopril on mortality and morbidity in patients with left ventricular dysfunction after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1992;327:669–677. 677. Dargie HJ. Effect of carvedilol on outcome after myocardial infarction in patients with left-ventricular dysfunction: the CAPRICORN randomised trial. Lancet 2001;357:1385–1390. 678. Abdel-Qadir H, Tai F, Croxford R, Austin PC, Amir E, Calvillo-Argüelles O, et al. Characteristics and outcomes of women developing heart failure after early stage breast cancer chemotherapy: a population-based matched cohort study. Circ Heart Fail 2021;14:e008110. 679. Curigliano G, Cardinale D, Suter T, Plataniotis G, De Azambuja E, Sandri MT, et al. Cardiovascular toxicity induced by chemotherapy, targeted agents and radiotherapy: ESMO clinical practice guidelines. Ann Oncol 2012;23:vii155–66. 680. Adams MJ, Hardenbergh PH, Constine LS, Lipshultz SE. Radiation-associated cardiovascular disease. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2003;45:55–75. 681. Taylor C, Duane FK, Dodwell D, Gray R, Wang Z, Wang Y, et al. Estimating the risks of breast cancer radiotherapy: evidence from modern radiation doses to the lungs and heart and from previous randomized trials. J Clin Oncol 2017;35: 1641–1649. 682. Reed GW, Masri A, Griffin BP, Kapadia SR, Ellis SG, Desai MY. Long-term mortality in patients with radiation-associated coronary artery disease treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 2016;9:e003483. 683. Liang JJ, Sio TT, Slusser JP, Lennon RJ, Miller RC, Sandhu G, et al. Outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention with stents in patients treated with thoracic external beam radiation for cancer. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2014;7:1412–1420. 684. Cuomo JR, Javaheri SP, Sharma GK, Kapoor D, Berman AE, Weintraub NL. How to prevent and manage radiation-induced coronary artery disease. Heart 2018;104: 1647–1653. 685. Feldman DR, Schaffer WL, Steingart RM. Late cardiovascular toxicity following chemotherapy for germ cell tumors. JNCCN J Natl Compr Cancer Netw 2012;10: 537–544. 686. Sudhakar R. Response to treatment and outcomes of acute coronary syndrome in the cancer population. Clin Cardiol 2012;35:646. 687. Nielsen SF, Nordestgaard BG, Bojesen SE. Statin use and reduced cancer-related mortality. N Engl J Med 2013;368:574–577. 688. Han X-J, Li J-Q, Khannanova Z, Li Y. Optimal management of coronary artery disease in cancer patients. Chronic Dis Transl Med 2019;5:221–233. 689. Neumann FJ, Sousa-Uva M, Ahlsson A, Alfonso F, Banning AP, Benedetto U, et al. (2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization). Kardiol Pol 2018; 76:1585–1664. 690. Wu W, Masri A, Popovic ZB, Smedira NG, Lytle BW, Marwick TH, et al. Long-term survival of patients with radiation heart disease undergoing cardiac surgery: a cohort study. Circulation 2013;127:1476–1484. 691. Gujral DM, Lloyd G, Bhattacharyya S. Radiation-induced valvular heart disease. Heart 2016;102:269–276. 692. Baumgartner H, Falk V, Bax JJ, De Bonis M, Hamm C, Holm PJ, et al. 2017 ESC/ EACTS Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. Eur Heart J 2017;38:2739–2791. 693. Lind A, Totzeck M, Mahabadi AA, Jánosi RA, El Gabry M, Ruhparwar A, et al. Impact of cancer in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a singlecenter study. JACC CardioOncology 2020;2:735–743. 694. Yazdchi F, Hirji SA, Nohria A, Percy E, Harloff M, Malarczyk A, et al. Transcatheter compared with surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with previous chestdirected radiation therapy. JACC CardioOncology 2021;3:397–407. 695. Guha A, Dey AK, Omer S, Abraham WT, Attizzani G, Jneid H, et al. Contemporary trends and outcomes of percutaneous and surgical mitral valve replacement or repair in patients with cancer. Am J Cardiol 2020;125:1355–1360. 696. Elbadawi A, Albaeni A, Elgendy IY, Ogunbayo GO, Jimenez E, Cornwell L, et al. Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with prior mediastinal radiation. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2020;13:2658–2666. 697. Zafar MR, Mustafa SF, Miller TW, Alkhawlani T, Sharma UC. Outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in cancer survivors with prior chest radiation therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cardio-Oncology 2020;6:8. 698. Hadzijusufovic E, Albrecht-Schgoer K, Huber K, Hoermann G, Grebien F, Eisenwort G, et al. Nilotinib-induced vasculopathy: identification of vascular endothelial cells as a primary target site. Leukemia 2017;31:2388–2397. 699. Berger CC, Bokemeyer C, Schneider M, Kuczyk MA, Schmoll HJ. Secondary Raynaud’s phenomenon and other late vascular complications following chemotherapy for testicular cancer. Eur J Cancer 1995;31A:2229–2238. 700. Stelwagen J, Lubberts S, Steggink LC, Steursma G, Kruyt LM, Donkerbroek JW, et al. Vascular aging in long-term survivors of testicular cancer more than 20 years Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

after treatment with cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Br J Cancer 2020;123: 1599–1607. 701. Andreassi MG, Piccaluga E, Gargani L, Sabatino L, Borghini A, Faita F, et al. Subclinical carotid atherosclerosis and early vascular aging from long-term lowdose ionizing radiation exposure: a genetic, telomere, and vascular ultrasound study in cardiac catheterization laboratory staff. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2015;8:616–627. 702. Carmody BJ, Arora S, Avena R, Curry KM, Simpkins J, Cosby K, et al. Accelerated carotid artery disease after high-dose head and neck radiotherapy: is there a role for routine carotid duplex surveillance? J Vasc Surg 1999;30:1045–1051. 703. Carpenter DJ, Mowery YM, Broadwater G, Rodrigues A, Wisdom AJ, Dorth JA, et al. The risk of carotid stenosis in head and neck cancer patients after radiation therapy. Oral Oncol 2018;80:9–15. 704. Szpakowski N, Desai MY. Radiation-associated pericardial disease. Curr Cardiol Rep 2019;21:97. 705. Schultz-Hector S, Trott KR. Radiation-induced cardiovascular diseases: is the epidemiologic evidence compatible with the radiobiologic data? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007;67:10–18. 706. Ning MS, Tang L, Gomez DR, Xu T, Luo Y, Huo J, et al. Incidence and predictors of pericardial effusion after chemoradiation therapy for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2017;99:70–79. 707. Wei X, Liu HH, Tucker SL, Wang S, Mohan R, Cox JD, et al. Risk factors for pericardial effusion in inoperable esophageal cancer patients treated with definitive chemoradiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008;70:707–714. 708. Gagliardi G, Constine LS, Moiseenko V, Correa C, Pierce LJ, Allen AM, et al. Radiation dose-volume effects in the heart. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2010;76: S77–S85. 709. Chiabrando JG, Bonaventura A, Vecchié A, Wohlford GF, Mauro AG, Jordan JH, et al. Management of acute and recurrent pericarditis: JACC state-of-the-art review. J Am Coll Cardiol 2020;75:76–92. 710. Donnellan E, Phelan D, Mccarthy CP, Collier P, Desai M, Griffin B. Radiation-induced heart disease: a practical guide to diagnosis and management. Cleve Clin J Med 2016;83:914–922. 711. Crestanello JA, McGregor CGA, Danielson GK, Daly RC, Dearani JA, Orszulak TA, et al. Mitral and tricuspid valve repair in patients with previous mediastinal radiation therapy. Ann Thorac Surg 2004;78:826–831. 712. Heidenreich PA, Kapoor JR. Radiation induced heart disease. Heart 2009;95: 252–258. 713. Walsh D, Nelson KA. Autonomic nervous system dysfunction in advanced cancer. Support Care Cancer 2002;10:523–528. 714. Noor B, Akhavan S, Leuchter M, Yang EH, Ajijola OA. Quantitative assessment of cardiovascular autonomic impairment in cancer survivors: a single center case series. Cardio-Oncology 2020;6:11. 715. Gibson TM, Li Z, Green DM, Armstrong GT, Mulrooney DA, Srivastava DK, et al. Blood pressure status in adult survivors of childhood cancer: a report from the St. Jude Lifetime Cohort Study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2017;26: 1705–1713. 716. Friedman DN, Tonorezos ES, Cohen P. Diabetes and metabolic syndrome in survivors of childhood cancer. Horm Res Paediatr 2019;91:118–127. 717. Pekmezi DW, Demark-Wahnefried W. Updated evidence in support of diet and exercise interventions in cancer survivors. Acta Oncol (Madr) 2011;50:167–178. 718. Chlebowski RT, Aiello E, McTiernan A. Weight loss in breast cancer patient management. J Clin Oncol 2002;20:1128–1143. 719. Protani M, Coory M, Martin JH. Effect of obesity on survival of women with breast cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2010;123: 627–635. 720. Meyerhardt JA, Ma J, Courneya KS. Energetics in colorectal and prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:4066–4073. 721. Wright ME, Chang SC, Schatzkin A, Albanes D, Kipnis V, Mouw T, et al. Prospective study of adiposity and weight change in relation to prostate cancer incidence and mortality. Cancer 2007;109:675–684. 722. Siegel EM, Ulrich CM, Poole EM, Holmes RS, Jacobsen PB, Shibata D. The effects of obesity and obesity-related conditions on colorectal cancer prognosis. Cancer Control 2010;17:52–57. 723. Kroenke CH, Chen WY, Rosner B, Holmes MD. Weight, weight gain, and survival after breast cancer diagnosis. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:1370–1378. 724. Meyerhardt JA, Niedzwiecki D, Hollis D, Saltz LB, Mayer RJ, Nelson H, et al. Impact of body mass index and weight change after treatment on cancer recurrence and survival in patients with stage III colon cancer: Findings from Cancer and Leukemia Group B 89803. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:4109–4115. 725. Kroenke CH, Fung TT, Hu FB, Holmes MD. Dietary patterns and survival after breast cancer diagnosis. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:9295–9303. 726. Kwan ML, Weltzien E, Kushi LH, Castillo A, Slattery ML, Caan BJ. Dietary patterns and breast cancer recurrence and survival among women with early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:919–926. 727. Meyerhardt JA, Niedzwiecki D, Hollis D, Saltz LB, Hu FB, Mayer RJ, et al. Association of dietary patterns with cancer recurrence and survival in patients with stage III colon cancer. J Am Med Assoc 2007;298:754–764. 728. Yang J, Li C, Shen Y, Zhou H, Shao Y, Zhu W, et al. Impact of statin use on cancerspecific mortality and recurrence: a meta-analysis of 60 observational studies. Medicine 2020;99:e19596. 729. Kim J, Choi EA, Han YE, Woo Lee J, Seul Kim Y, Kim Y, et al. Association between statin use and all-cause mortality in cancer survivors, based on the Korean health insurance service between 2002 and 2015. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis 2020;30: 434–440. 730. Ren QW, Yu SY, Teng THK, Li X, Cheung KS, Wu MZ, et al. Statin associated lower cancer risk and related mortality in patients with heart failure. Eur Heart J 2021;42: 3049–3059. 731. Galvão DA, Taaffe DR, Spry N, Joseph D, Newton RU. Combined resistance and aerobic exercise program reverses muscle loss in men undergoing androgen suppression therapy for prostate cancer without bone metastases: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:340–347. 732. Speck RM, Courneya KS, Mâsse LC, Duval S, Schmitz KH. An update of controlled physical activity trials in cancer survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Cancer Surviv 2010;4:87–100. 733. Campia U, Barac A. Exercise and aerobic fitness to reduce cancer-related cardiovascular toxicity. Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med 2016;18:44. 734. Jones LW, Liu Q, Armstrong GT, Ness KK, Yasui Y, Devine K, et al. Exercise and risk of major cardiovascular events in adult survivors of childhood Hodgkin lymphoma: a report from the childhood cancer survivor study. J Clin Oncol 2014;32: 3643–3650. 735. Scott JM, Li N, Liu Q, Yasui Y, Leisenring W, Nathan PC, et al. Association of exercise with mortality in adult survivors of childhood cancer. JAMA Oncol 2018;4:1352–1358. 736. Rock CL, Doyle C, Demark-Wahnefried W, Meyerhardt J, Courneya KS, Schwartz AL, et al. Nutrition and physical activity guidelines for cancer survivors. CA Cancer J Clin 2012;62:242–274. 737. CDC. Cancer Data and Statistics | Survival Information from the National Cancer Institute and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2013. 738. Thompson KA, Hildebrandt MAT, Ater JL. Cardiac outcomes with pregnancy after cardiotoxic therapy for childhood cancer. J Am Coll Cardiol 2017;69: 594–595. 739. Nolan M, Oikonomou EK, Silversides CK, Hines MR, Thompson KA, Campbell BA, et al. Impact of cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction on risk of heart failure in pregnancy. JACC CardioOncology 2020;2:153–162. 740. Chait-Rubinek L, Mariani JA, Goroncy N, Herschtal A, Wheeler GC, Dwyer MK, et al. A retrospective evaluation of risk of peripartum cardiac dysfunction in survivors of childhood, adolescent and young adult malignancies. Cancers (Basel) 2019; 11:1046. 741. Regitz-Zagrosek V, Roos-Hesselink JW, Bauersachs J, Blomström-Lundqvist C, Cífková R, De Bonis M, et al. 2018 ESC Guidelines for the management of cardiovascular diseases during pregnancy. Eur Heart J 2018;39:3165–3241. 742. Mehta LS, Warnes CA, Bradley E, Burton T, Economy K, Mehran R, et al. Cardiovascular considerations in caring for pregnant patients: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2020;141:e884–e903. 743. Travis WD, Brambilla E, Burke AP, Marx A, Nicholson AG, eds. WHO Classification of Tumours of the Lung, Pleura, Thymus and Heart, 4th ed. 2015. ISBN 978-92-832-2436-5 744. Burke A, Tavora F. The 2015 WHO Classification of tumors of the heart and pericardium. J Thorac Oncol 2016;11:441–452. 745. Cresti A, Chiavarelli M, Glauber M, Tanganelli P, Scalese M, Cesareo F, et al. Incidence rate of primary cardiac tumors: a 14-year population study. J Cardiovasc Med 2016;17:37–43. 746. Maleszewski JJ, Bois MC, Bois JP, Young PM, Stulak JM, Klarich KW. Neoplasia and the heart: pathological review of effects with clinical and radiological correlation. J Am Coll Cardiol 2018;72:202–227. 747. Tyebally S, Chen S, Bhattacharyya S, Mughrabi S, Hussain Z, Manisty C, et al. Cardiac tumors: JACC CardioOncology state-of-the-art review. JACC CardioOncology 2020;2: 293–311. 748. Kirkpatrick JN, Wong T, Bednarz JE, Spencer KT, Sugeng L, Ward RP, et al. Differential diagnosis of cardiac masses using contrast echocardiographic perfusion imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;43:1412–1419. 749. Thiene G, Rizzo S, Marra MP, Valente M, Basso C. Masses and cardiac tumours: classification and diagnosis. ESC CardioMED, 2018. DOI:10.1093/med/9780198784906. 003.0386 750. Zaragosa-Macias E, Chen MA, Gill EA. Real time three-dimensional echocardiography evaluation of intracardiac masses. Echocardiography 2012;29:207–219. 751. Beroukhim RS, Prakash A, Valsangiacomo Buechel ER, Cava JR, Dorfman AL, Festa P, et al. Characterization of cardiac tumors in children by cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging: a multicenter experience. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011;58:1044–1054. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

752. Rahbar K, Seifarth H, Schäfers M, Stegger L, Hoffmeier A, Spieker T, et al. Differentiation of malignant and benign cardiac tumors using 18F-FDG PET/CT. J Nucl Med 2012;53:856–863. 753. Kassop D, Donovan MS, Cheezum MK, Nguyen BT, Gambill NB, Blankstein R, et al. Cardiac masses on cardiac CT: a review. Curr Cardiovasc Imaging Rep 2014;7:9281. 754. D’Angelo EC, Paolisso P, Vitale G, Foà A, Bergamaschi L, Magnani I, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of cardiac computed tomography and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose with positron emission tomography in cardiac masses. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2020;13: 2400–2411. 755. Butany J, Nair V, Naseemuddin A, Nair GM, Catton C, Yau T. Cardiac tumours: diagnosis and management. Lancet Oncol 2005;6:219–228. 756. Szmit S, Zagrodzka M, Kurzyna M, Opolski G, Szczylik C. Sunitinib malate, a receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, is effective in the treatment of restrictive heart failure due to heart metastases from renal cell carcinoma. Cardiology 2009;114:67–71. 757. Peccatori FA, Azim JA, Orecchia R, Hoekstra HJ, Pavlidis N, Kesic V, et al. Cancer, pregnancy and fertility: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2013;24:vi160–70. 758. Cubillo A, Morales S, Goñi E, Matute F, Muñoz JL, Pérez-Díaz D, et al. Multidisciplinary consensus on cancer management during pregnancy. Clin Transl Oncol 2021;23:1054–1066. 759. Silverstein J, Post AL, Chien AJ, Olin R, Tsai KK, Ngo Z, et al. Multidisciplinary management of cancer during pregnancy. JCO Oncol Pract 2020;16:545–557. 760. Amant F, Berveiller P, Boere IA, Cardonick E, Fruscio R, Fumagalli M, et al. Gynecologic cancers in pregnancy: guidelines based on a third international consensus meeting. Ann Oncol 2019;30:1601–1612. 761. Dunleavy K, McLintock C. How I treat lymphoma in pregnancy. Blood 2020;136: 2118–2124. 762. Ducas RA, Elliott JE, Melnyk SF, Premecz S, Dasilva M, Cleverley K, et al. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance in pregnancy: insights from the Cardiac Hemodynamic Imaging and Remodeling in Pregnancy (CHIRP) study. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2014;16:1. 763. Savu O, Jurcuţ R, Giuşcǎ S, Van Mieghem T, Gussi I, Popescu BA, et al. Morphological and functional adaptation of the maternal heart during pregnancy. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2012;5:289–297. 764. Narayanan M, Elkayam U, Naqvi TZ. Echocardiography in pregnancy: part 2. Curr Cardiol Rep 2016;18:90. 765. Furenäs E, Eriksson P, Wennerholm UB, Dellborg M. Pregnancy in a healthy population: dynamics of NTproBNP and hs-cTroponin T. Open Heart 2020;7:e001293. 766. Tanous D, Siu SC, Mason J, Greutmann M, Wald RM, Parker JD, et al. B-type natriuretic peptide in pregnant women with heart disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;56: 1247–1253. 767. Heit JA, Kobbervig CE, James AH, Petterson TM, Bailey KR, Melton LJ III. Trends in the incidence of venous thromboembolism during pregnancy or postpartum: a 30-year population-based study. Ann Intern Med 2005;143:697–706. 768. Sultan AA, West J, Tata LJ, Fleming KM, Nelson-Piercy C, Grainge MJ. Risk of first venous thromboembolism in pregnant women in hospital: population based cohort study from England. BMJ 2013;347:f6099. 769. Sultan AA, West J, Tata LJ, Fleming KM, Nelson-Piercy C, Grainge MJ. Risk of first venous thromboembolism in and around pregnancy: a population-based cohort study. Br J Haematol 2012;156:366–373. 770. Hase EA, de Barros VIPVL, Igai AMK, Francisco RPV, Zugaib M. Risk assessment of venous thromboembolism and thromboprophylaxis in pregnant women hospitalized with cancer: preliminary results from a risk score. Clinics (Sao Paulo) 2018; 73:e368. 771. Fox DJ, Khattar RS. Carcinoid heart disease: presentation, diagnosis, and management. Heart 2004;90:1224–1228. 772. Davar J, Connolly HM, Caplin ME, Pavel M, Zacks J, Bhattacharyya S, et al. Diagnosing and managing carcinoid heart disease in patients with neuroendocrine tumors: an expert statement. J Am Coll Cardiol 2017;69:1288–1304. 773. Dobson R, Burgess MI, Pritchard DM, Cuthbertson DJ. The clinical presentation and management of carcinoid heart disease. Int J Cardiol 2014;173:29–32. 774. Lichtenauer M, Pichler T, Eder S, Mirna M, Magnes T, Wernly B, et al. Carcinoid heart disease involving the left heart: a case report and biomarker analysis. ESC Heart Fail 2019;6:222–227. 775. Halperin DM, Shen C, Dasari A, Xu Y, Chu Y, Zhou S, et al. Frequency of carcinoid syndrome at neuroendocrine tumour diagnosis: a population-based study. Lancet Oncol 2017;18:525–534. 776. Bhattacharyya S, Davar J, Dreyfus G, Caplin ME. Carcinoid heart disease. Circulation 2007;116:2860–2865. 777. Zuetenhorst JM, Korse CM, Bonfrer JMG, Bakker RH, Taal BG. Role of natriuretic peptides in the diagnosis and treatment of patients with carcinoid heart disease. Br J Cancer 2004;90:2073–2079. 778. Dobson R, Burgess MI, Banks M, Pritchard DM, Vora J, Valle JW, et al. The association of a panel of biomarkers with the presence and severity of carcinoid heart disease: a cross-sectional study. PLoS One 2013;8:e73679. 779. Korse CM, Taal BG, De Groot CA, Bakker RH, Bonfrer JMG. Chromogranin-A and N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide: an excellent pair of biomarkers for diagnostics in patients with neuroendocrine tumor. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:4293–4299. 780. Bhattacharyya S, Toumpanakis C, Caplin ME, Davar J. Usefulness of N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide as a biomarker of the presence of carcinoid heart disease. Am J Cardiol 2008;102:938–942. 781. Kulke MH, Hörsch D, Caplin ME, Anthony LB, Bergsland E, Öberg K, et al. Telotristat ethyl, a tryptophan hydroxylase inhibitor for the treatment of carcinoid syndrome. J Clin Oncol 2017;35:14–23. 782. Dumoulein M, Verslype C, Van Cutsem E, Meuris B, Herijgers P, Flameng W, et al. Carcinoid heart disease: case and literature review. Acta Cardiol 2010;65:261–264. 783. Nguyen A, Schaff HV, Abel MD, Luis SA, Lahr BD, Halfdanarson TR, et al. Improving outcome of valve replacement for carcinoid heart disease. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2019;158:99–107.e2. 784. Mabvuure N, Cumberworth A, Hindocha S. In patients with carcinoid syndrome undergoing valve replacement: will a biological valve have acceptable durability? Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2012;15:467–471. 785. Connolly HM, Schaff HV, Abel MD, Rubin J, Askew JW, Li Z, et al. Early and late outcomes of surgical treatment in carcinoid heart disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2015; 66:2189–2196. 786. Sunjic I, Shin D, Sunjic KM, Popat JV, Tran T, Chae SH, et al. Incidence of atrioventricular block after valve replacement in carcinoid heart disease. Cardiol Res 2020; 11:56–60. 787. Kuntze T, Owais T, Secknus MA, Kaemmerer D, Baum R, Girdauskas E. Results of contemporary valve surgery in patients with carcinoid heart disease. J Heart Valve Dis 2016;25:356–363. 788. Luthra S, Olevano C, Richens T, Tsang GM. Percutaneous transcatheter valve-in-valve pulmonary and tricuspid replacement in carcinoid heart disease. JACC Case Reports 2020;2:533–536. 789. Zacks JS, Lavine R. Avoiding a repeat sternotomy in recurrent carcinoid heart disease. JACC Case Reports 2020;2:537–538. 790. Bhattacharyya S, Toumpanakis C, Burke M, Taylor AM, Caplin ME, Davar J. Features of carcinoid heart disease identified by 2- and 3-dimensional echocardiography and cardiac MRI. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2010;3:103–111. 791. Pellikka PA, Tajik AJ, Khandheria BK, Seward JB, Callahan JA, Pitot HC, et al. Carcinoid heart disease: clinical and echocardiographic spectrum in 74 patients. Circulation 1993;87:1188–1196. 792. Palladini G, Milani P, Merlini G. Management of AL amyloidosis in 2020. Blood 2020; 136:2620–2627. 793. Witteles RM, Liedtke M. AL amyloidosis for the cardiologist and oncologist: epidemiology, diagnosis, and management. JACC CardioOncology 2019;1:117–130. 794. Merlini G, Wechalekar AD, Palladini G. Systemic light chain amyloidosis: an update for treating physicians. Blood 2013;121:5124–5130. 795. Maurer MS, Elliott P, Comenzo R, Semigran M, Rapezzi C. Addressing common questions encountered in the diagnosis and management of cardiac amyloidosis. Circulation 2017;135:1357–1377. 796. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. Systemic Light Chain Amyloidosis Version 1. Natl Compr Cancer Netw 2021. https://www.nccn.org/. 797. Kumar S, Dispenzieri A, Lacy MQ, Hayman SR, Buadi FK, Colby C, et al. Revised prognostic staging system for light chain amyloidosis incorporating cardiac biomarkers and serum free light chain measurements. J Clin Oncol 2012;30:989–995. 798. Zhang KW, Miao J, Mitchell JD, Alvarez-Cardona J, Tomasek K, Su YR, et al. Plasma hepatocyte growth factor for diagnosis and prognosis in light chain and transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis. JACC CardioOncology 2020;2:56–66. 799. Mohan M, Buros A, Mathur P, Gokden N, Singh M, Susanibar S, et al. Clinical characteristics and prognostic factors in multiple myeloma patients with light chain deposition disease. Am J Hematol 2017;92:739–745. 800. Grogan M, DIspenzieri A, Gertz MA. Light-chain cardiac amyloidosis: strategies to promote early diagnosis and cardiac response. Heart 2017;103:1065–1072. 801. Jurcuţ R, Onciul S, Adam R, Stan C, Coriu D, Rapezzi C, et al. Multimodality imaging in cardiac amyloidosis: a primer for cardiologists. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 2020;21:833–844. 802. Lee Chuy K, Drill E, Yang JC, Landau H, Hassoun H, Nahhas O, et al. Incremental value of global longitudinal strain for predicting survival in patients with advanced AL amyloidosis. JACC CardioOncology 2020;2:223–231. 803. Brownrigg J, Lorenzini M, Lumley M, Elliott P. Diagnostic performance of imaging investigations in detecting and differentiating cardiac amyloidosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. ESC Heart Fail 2019;6:1041–1051. 804. Baggiano A, Boldrini M, Martinez-Naharro A, Kotecha T, Petrie A, Rezk T, et al. Noncontrast magnetic resonance for the diagnosis of cardiac amyloidosis. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2020;13:69–80. 805. Comenzo RL, Reece D, Palladini G, Seldin D, Sanchorawala V, Landau H, et al. Consensus guidelines for the conduct and reporting of clinical trials in systemic light-chain amyloidosis. Leukemia 2012;26:2317–2325. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026

806. Eckhert E, Witteles R, Kaufman G, Lafayette R, Arai S, Schrier S, et al. Grading cardiac response in AL amyloidosis: implications for relapse and survival. Br J Haematol 2019;186:144–146. 807. Vaxman I, Gertz M. Recent advances in the diagnosis, risk stratification, and management of systemic light-chain amyloidosis. Acta Haematol 2019;141:93–106. 808. Giancaterino S, Urey MA, Darden D, Hsu JC. Management of arrhythmias in cardiac amyloidosis. JACC Clin Electrophysiol 2020;6:351–361. 809. El-Am EA, Dispenzieri A, Melduni RM, Ammash NM, White RD, Hodge DO, et al. Direct current cardioversion of atrial arrhythmias in adults with cardiac amyloidosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2019;73:589–597. 810. Tahir UA, Doros G, Kim JS, Connors LH, Seldin DC, Sam F. Predictors of mortality in light chain cardiac amyloidosis with heart failure. Sci Rep 2019;9:8552. 811. Khanna S, Lo P, Cho K, Subbiah R. Ventricular arrhythmias in cardiac amyloidosis: a review of current literature. Clin Med Insights Cardiol 2020;14:1179546820963055. 812. Kastritis E, Leleu X, Arnulf B, Zamagni E, Cibeira MT, Kwok F, et al. Bortezomib, melphalan, and dexamethasone for light-chain amyloidosis. J Clin Oncol 2020;38: 3252–3260. 813. Palladini G, Kastritis E, Maurer MS, Zonder J, Minnema MC, Wechalekar AD, et al. Daratumumab plus CyBorD for patients with newly diagnosed AL amyloidosis: safety run-in results of ANDROMEDA. Blood 2020;136:71–80. 814. Huang X, Ren G, Chen W, Guo J, Zhao L, Zeng C, et al. The role of induction therapy before autologous stem cell transplantation in low disease burden AL amyloidosis patients. Amyloid 2021;28:75–83. 815. Barrett CD, Dobos K, Liedtke M, Tuzovic M, Haddad F, Kobayashi Y, et al. A changing landscape of mortality for systemic light chain amyloidosis. JACC Heart Fail 2019;7:958–966. 816. Zhang KW, Stockerl-Goldstein KE, Lenihan DJ. Emerging therapeutics for the treatment of light chain and transthyretin amyloidosis. JACC Basic Transl Sci 2019; 4:438–448. 817. Kastritis E, Palladini G, Minnema MC, Wechalekar AD, Jaccard A, Lee HC, et al. Daratumumab-based treatment for immunoglobulin light-chain amyloidosis. N Engl J Med 2021;385:46–58. 818. Wechalekar AD, Whelan C. Encouraging impact of doxycycline on early mortality in cardiac light chain (AL) amyloidosis. Blood Cancer J 2017;7:e546. 819. Shen K, Fu W, Wu Y, Dong Y, Huang Z, Wei Y, et al. Doxycycline combined with bortezomib–cyclophosphamide–dexamethasone chemotherapy for newly diagnosed cardiac light-chain amyloidosis: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Circulation 2021;145:8–17. 820. Salinaro F, Meier-Ewert HK, Miller EJ, Pandey S, Sanchorawala V, Berk JL, et al. Longitudinal systolic strain, cardiac function improvement, and survival following treatment of light-chain (AL) cardiac amyloidosis. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 2017;18:1057–1064. 821. Palladini G, Foli A, Milani P, Russo P, Albertini R, Lavatelli F, et al. Best use of cardiac biomarkers in patients with AL amyloidosis and renal failure. Am J Hematol 2012;87: 465–471. 822. Dispenzieri A, Gertz MA, Kyle RA, Lacy MQ, Burritt MF, Therneau TM, et al. Serum cardiac troponins and N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide: a staging system for primary systemic amyloidosis. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:3751–3757. 823. Zaremba T, Jakobsen AR, SØgaard M, ThØgersen AM, Johansen MB, Madsen LæB, et al. Risk of device malfunction in cancer patients with implantable cardiac device undergoing radiotherapy: a population-based cohort study. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2015;38:343–356. 824. Miften M, Mihailidis D, Kry SF, Reft C, Esquivel C, Farr J, et al. Management of radiotherapy patients with implanted cardiac pacemakers and defibrillators: a report of the AAPM TG-203. Med Phys 2019;46:e757–e788. 825. Hurkmans CW, Knegjens JL, Oei BS, Maas AJJ, Uiterwaal GJ, van der Borden AJ, et al. Management of radiation oncology patients with a pacemaker or ICD: a new comprehensive practical guideline in The Netherlands. Radiat Oncol 2012;7: 198. 826. Indik JH, Gimbel JR, Abe H, Alkmim-Teixeira R, Birgersdotter-Green U, Clarke GD, et al. 2017 HRS expert consensus statement on magnetic resonance imaging and radiation exposure in patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices. Heart Rhythm 2017;14:e97–e153. 827. Zaremba T, Jakobsen AR, Søgaard M, Thøgersen AM, Riahi S. Radiotherapy in patients with pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators: a literature review. Europace 2016;18:479–491. 828. Grant JD, Jensen GL, Tang C, Pollard JM, Kry SF, Krishnan S, et al. Radiotherapy-induced malfunction in contemporary cardiovascular implantable electronic devices: clinical incidence and predictors. JAMA Oncol 2015;1:624–632. 829. Zecchin M, Severgnini M, Fiorentino A, Malavasi VL, Menegotti L, Alongi F, et al. Management of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) undergoing radiotherapy: a consensus document from Associazione Italiana Aritmologia e Cardiostimolazione (AIAC), Associazione Italiana Radioterapia Oncologica (AIRO), Associazione Italiana Fisica Medica (AIFM). Int J Cardiol 2018;255:175–183. 830. Gomez DR, Poenisch F, Pinnix CC, Sheu T, Chang JY, Memon N, et al. Malfunctions of implantable cardiac devices in patients receiving proton beam therapy: incidence and predictors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2013;87:570–575. 831. Sharifzadehgan A, Laurans M, Thuillot M, Huertas A, Baudinaud P, Narayanan K, et al. Radiotherapy in patients with a cardiac implantable electronic device. Am J Cardiol 2020;128:196–201. 832. Stienen JJC, Ottevanger PB, Wennekes L, Dekker HM, van der Maazen RWM, Mandigers CMPW, et al. Development and evaluation of an educational E-tool to help patients with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma manage their personal care pathway. JMIR Res Protoc 2015;4:e6. 833. Murphy P, Levine A, Lerma T, Young S, Hwang J, Goldsby R. A portable survivorship care plan: a tool that helps educate and improve knowledge in childhood cancer survivors. Support Care Cancer 2021;29:169–177. 834. Asteggiano R, Aboyans V, Lee G, Salinger S, Richter D. Cardiology care delivered to cancer patients. Eur Heart J 2020;41:205–206. 835. Aktaa S, Batra G, Wallentin L, Baigent C, Erlinge D, James S, et al. European Society of Cardiology methodology for the development of quality indicators for the quantification of cardiovascular care and outcomes. Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes 2022;8:4–13. 836. Minchin M, Roland M, Richardson J, Rowark S, Guthrie B. Quality of care in the United Kingdom after removal of financial incentives. N Engl J Med 2018;379: 948–957. 837. Song Z, Ji Y, Safran DG, Chernew ME. Health care spending, utilization, and quality 8 years into global payment. N Engl J Med 2019;381:252–263. Downloaded from academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/41/4229/6673995 by guest on 07 October 2026